petition with the High Court: overturn the government's decision to occupy Gaza city

A group of prominent Israeli civilians, including retired military officers, legal professionals, and industrialists, filed a petition with the High Court of Justice today, seeking to overturn the government's recent decision to occupy Gaza City.

The petition challenges the cabinet’s adoption of a proposal by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take control of Gaza City, arguing that the decision was made against the recommendation of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and without fully assessing its existential, security, and international implications.

The petition was filed by six individuals: Meir Arnon, Lt. Col. (res.) David Agmon, Lt. Col. (res.) Ofer Lapidot, Lt. Col. (res.) Uri Arad, Dr. Gideon Avital Epstein, and Eli Bar-Or, who are represented by attorney Daniel Halaki.

In their petition, they allege that IDF Chief of Staff Brig. Gen. Eyal Zamir explicitly opposed the operation. According to them, Zamir warned that a full occupation of Gaza City would:

• Jeopardize the lives of hostages still held in Gaza;

• Accelerate the breakdown of both regular and reserve forces;

• Threaten national security by potentially collapsing the reserve system.

Despite these warnings, the petitioners claim the cabinet pushed forward with the operation, disregarding expert military counsel.

Calls for Transparency

While recognizing the Court's traditionally limited intervention in political and military matters, the petitioners requested the public disclosure of the cabinet’s decision-making process.

“The honorable court is requested to at least order the respondent to publicly publish the reasons for this decision,” the petition states.

Such disclosure, they argue, is essential for public accountability, especially when the IDF’s top brass allegedly opposed the move.

Legal Troubles Raise Additional Concerns

The petition also raises serious questions about the political motivations behind the cabinet’s decision. It notes that the move was made by a minority government, led by a Prime Minister currently facing a criminal trial, and suggests that Netanyahu’s personal legal and political interests may have influenced the proposal.

“The decision was made by a Prime Minister under indictment,” the petition claims. “Such a government must act with extreme caution on matters of national fate, especially when the motives may not be solely strategic.”

Legal Uncertainty and Strategic Risks

The filing adds to a growing debate over the legal limits of government action in wartime, especially when it defies military assessments. While the High Court has traditionally shown deference to the executive in military matters, the unprecedented nature of the petition, along with its national security arguments, may prompt the Court to weigh in.

It remains unclear when the High Court will hear the petition or whether it will demand a formal government response, but legal analysts say that the Court may at least order the publication of the cabinet's justifications — a move that could reveal internal divisions within the Israeli leadership.