Knesset passes in first reading bill to establish political probe into October 7

The bill advanced unanimously with 59 lawmakers in favor, as the opposition continued its boycott of the legislation and did not participate in the vote.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid said regarding the boycott that the opposition would "not be part of a sham designed solely to whitewash and prevent an investigation into the greatest disaster that has befallen the Jewish people since the Holocaust."

The advancement of the legislation comes nearly three years after the massacre, with no probe yet established amid an ongoing dispute over what kind of investigation should be conducted and who should lead it.

The bill, which was sponsored by Likud MK Ariel Kallner, seeks to promote a new investigative framework that diverges from the traditional independent state commission of inquiry mechanism, which is overseen by the Supreme Court.

Kallner argued that the legislation was fair and balanced, telling the plenum that "only a commission appointed in an equal manner will be able to address both the pursuit of truth and the issue of public trust."

The advancement of the bill also comes as the coalition has been pushing forward with various pieces of contentious legislation during the government’s last Knesset term ahead of elections.

With the Knesset’s expected dissolution around mid-July, the legislation will most likely not be able to pass its second and third readings. However, by having the bill be passed in its first reading, progress can continue from where it left off even in the next Knesset due to the parliament’s continuity motion policy, allowing it to be advanced more rapidly in the future.

Without having the community status, when a new Knesset is formed, the legislation would not hold the continuity status, and progress on it would be reversed.

The bill, which passed its preliminary reading in December, must still pass two additional plenum readings to be written into law.

The make-up of the bill differs from the traditional state commission of inquiry mechanism set out in the 1968 Commissions of Inquiry Law.

A state commission of inquiry is considered the most authoritative and independent investigative system under Israeli law. It operates entirely outside the political echelon – with members appointed by the Supreme Court’s chief justice – and has the power to subpoena witnesses and issue personal recommendations regarding individuals.

Under the framework laid out in Kallner’s bill proposal, Supreme Court appointments would be replaced by members selected through a Knesset-led process.

According to the bill, the commission would be composed of six members appointed by the Knesset. Lawmakers would first be given a limited period to reach an agreement on all appointments in a vote requiring a supermajority of 80 Knesset members.

A contentious part of the bill, which was decided after various revisions, is that if the opposition chooses not to participate in the committee – a scenario likely to happen – the investigative committee would be permitted to run in a reduced format with only three members who were from the coalition.

Until now, opposition lawmakers have boycotted all committee discussions on the bill, stating that they would not partake in discussions on the legislation and that they refuse to cooperate with the advancement of such a probe.

According to the bill, the Knesset Speaker would be responsible for providing a list of who would be on the commission and would be expected to consult with both coalition and opposition factions about the appointments.

At least one commission member would be required to be qualified for appointment as a Supreme Court justice, which would entail that they were an attorney with a minimum of ten years of legal experience.

If an agreement was not reached in the supermajority vote, the coalition and the leader of the opposition would each appoint three members to the committee.

The coalition’s appointments would require written support from at least 61 coalition MKs, while the opposition’s appointments would require written support from a majority of opposition MKs.

The committee hearings are expected to be open to the public and to being broadcast, though the broadcast would not be live.

The commission would also have the choice to determine the rules governing broadcasts and could distinguish between making a hearing public or not.

During debates in the Knesset when the legislation was being advanced, various additions and subtractions were made to the bill that led to outrage from bereaved families and victims of the attacks.

In May, wording calling for a “full, thorough, and independent investigation” into the attacks was briefly removed.

The Knesset’s Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee legal adviser had also warned before previous revisions that the bill could jeopardize the integrity of an investigation into the October 7 attacks and highlighted several structural issues with the proposed framework.

Netanyahu is among the only major officials who have not resigned after the October 7 massacre.

The political echelon has repeatedly blocked a state inquiry into the events surrounding the attacks, despite polls showing huge public support for this type of investigation.

Amid the ongoing rift between the government and the judiciary, Netanyahu has repeatedly spoken out against judicial appointments being in charge of the investigation.

Netanyahu also released a 55-page document in February that outlined answers he gave to State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman as part of the investigation into October 7.

The prime minister’s answers point to failures among officials in the security establishment and appear to deflect his role in the outcome of the Hamas attacks. Opposition leader Yair Lapid has accused Netanyahu of manipulating and selectively editing the documents to evade responsibility.

Ahead of the first reading vote in the Knesset, the October Council, which represents victims and bereaved families of the attacks, slammed the legislation, accusing the government of attempting to whitewash its failures.

The group stated that the “coalition of the massacre” was bringing to a first reading a law that will establish a political commission that will “help save them from their share of responsibility for the greatest massacre that has occurred to the Jewish people since the Holocaust.”

“A massacre in which our loved ones were raped, kidnapped, burned, murdered, and slaughtered.”

“This disgraceful bill is not intended to investigate the truth, but to bury it alongside our children, brothers and sisters, parents, and friends,” the October Council added.

Opposition party leaders in the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu in the upcoming elections slammed the legislation's advancement and vowed that the next government would establish a state commission of inquiry into the attacks.

Yashar Party leader Gadi Eisenkot said that "only those who know the truth and fear it establish a political, biased commission of inquiry, meant to whitewash and retroactively engineer public perception.

"Netanyahu, you are afraid, and rightly so. Release the full protocols and the truth to the public," he added.

Former prime minister Naftali Bennett, who leads the Together Party, also pledged to establish a state commission of inquiry, stating that “Without an investigation there is no correction."

"A government that runs away from an investigation condemns Israel to further and further disasters," Bennett added.