State Comptroller-elect Michael Rabello told the High Court of Justice on Tuesday that there was no legal basis to cancel the Knesset vote in which he was elected, rejecting claims that his selection was tainted by political dependence, conflicts of interest, or the controversy over coalition MKs allegedly documenting their ballots behind the curtain.
Rabello, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s personal attorney, was elected on June 3 as Israel’s next state comptroller after a dramatic and disputed Knesset vote. In the first round, retired Supreme Court justice Yosef Elron received 60 votes, and Rabello received 57, leaving both candidates short of the required 61. A second round was then held, during which opposition MKs alleged that coalition lawmakers had been instructed to photograph their ballots despite the legal requirement that the state comptroller be elected by secret vote.
After the vote was restarted, Rabello defeated Elron 61-57.
The result prompted a series of High Court petitions seeking to cancel the election and hold a new vote.
Rabello’s preliminary response, filed through attorney Ofek Bruck, presents two main arguments: that there is no personal disqualification preventing him from serving as state comptroller, and that the voting procedure, even if controversial, was not unlawful in a way that justifies judicial intervention.
“At the outset,” Rabello wrote, he “accepts the role to which he was elected with a deep sense of responsibility and full commitment to all citizens of Israel.” He rejected “any claim of political or other dependence” and any attempt to attribute wrongdoing to his agreement to stand as a candidate and accept “the important role of state audit.”
Rabello argues petitions trying to turn criticism into legal bar
Rabello argued that the petitions were wrongly trying to turn criticism of his professional background into a legal bar to his appointment. The law, he said, gives the discretion to choose the state comptroller to members of Knesset, not to petitioners, and most MKs chose him while his professional background was “open and known” to them.
He emphasized that he had never been a member of any political party, had worked for more than three decades as a professional attorney in the private sector, and had represented a range of clients. He said he left a “comfortable and quiet” private life in order to try to contribute to the state and its citizens.
“It should be presumed that the respondent will act for all citizens of the state in the role of state comptroller to which he was lawfully elected,” the response said, adding that he would act with “integrity, fairness, and backbone.”
Rabello acknowledged that the state comptroller must be independent and free of dependence, but argued that the law already provides safeguards to ensure that independence. The state comptroller is elected by the Knesset rather than appointed by the government, swears allegiance before the Knesset, works in connection with the Knesset State Control Committee, and is subject to strict limits on political activity and outside work during the term.
He also argued that Israeli law does not disqualify people from public office merely because they had prior ties to appointing or auditing bodies. The response noted that eligibility rules for the state comptroller do not even bar political figures or serving MKs from being candidates, provided they leave the Knesset when entering the role. Rabello argued that if such candidates are not automatically disqualified, then there is no basis to disqualify a private attorney who served as one of the prime minister’s lawyers.
Rabello accepted that there may be conflicts of interest in certain matters, but said the proper solution was a standard conflict-of-interest arrangement, not blanket cancellation of his election. Such an arrangement, he said, would be prepared when he enters office, would prevent him from handling specific matters in which he has a direct personal connection, and would be published to the public.
On the vote itself, Rabello said he was not present in the Knesset election process and did not watch all stages of it. His position, he said, relied on the Knesset legal adviser’s account of the events.
Law requires comptroller be elected by secret ballot
According to Rabello, the law requires that the state comptroller be elected by secret ballot, but does not include an explicit ban on an MK voluntarily photographing his or her own ballot. He argued that the secrecy belongs to the voter, and that no petition had pointed to a binding legal source prohibiting a person voting behind a curtain from documenting his own vote.
Rabello’s response cited Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana’s remarks during the vote, after consultation with the Knesset legal adviser, Knesset secretary, coalition chairman, opposition representative, and the ballot committee. Ohana said that if there had been an instruction to photograph ballots, it was “not valid and not legal,” but added that “the secrecy is the voter’s” and that if an MK wanted “to vote and photograph himself,” that was his right.
Ohana then ordered the ballot box emptied and the second round restarted “so that there would be no doubts about integrity.” According to the Knesset protocol cited by Rabello, Yesh Atid MK Merav Ben-Ari, serving as an opposition representative, then said the opposition wanted to proceed with the vote.
He argued that this cross-party understanding, or at least the absence of objection at the time, undercut the petitions’ claim that the procedure was unlawful. He said that to overturn the election, petitioners would need “substantial evidentiary material” showing that MKs were coerced or unlawfully pressured into voting a certain way through an instruction to document their ballots.
The petitions, he argued, lacked that factual basis. He also noted that the Knesset legal adviser had been told by coalition officials that no such instruction had been given to any MK.
Rabello further argued that canceling the result would amount to changing the rules after the vote had already taken place. Election rules, he said, must be “stable, consistent, certain, and clear” before a vote begins, and it would be improper for the court to retroactively impose a new legal rule on actions that were lawful when completed.
Rabello ended by warning that a rerun would create practical and constitutional difficulties because the Knesset’s composition has changed since the vote. He also noted that the legal deadline requiring the state comptroller to be elected before the end of the current comptroller’s term has already passed.
The High Court is expected to hear the petitions against Rabello’s election this week. The petitions also seek interim relief preventing him from pledging allegiance before the Knesset and entering office before the court rules.