Threat of an explosion in the Bar Association: The Likud's dramatic decision

A legal and political storm is shaking the Likud following the decision of the movement's internal tribunal to cancel the "districts clause." While the party leadership is considering appealing the move to the District Court through attorney Ilan Bombach, senior Likud officials are issuing an unequivocal threat: filing such a petition will lead to an immediate explosion and a direct appeal to the Israel Bar Association's Ethics Committee against the legal advisor.

The current storm erupted after the Likud tribunal accepted a series of petitions and decided to cancel the approval of the "districts clause" and the reserved-seat measures promoted by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister Haim Katz.

The decision determined unequivocally that incumbent ministers, deputy ministers, and Knesset members will not be able to run for the reserved slots in the various districts, unless they choose to resign from their positions in the Knesset. This ruling was perceived as a heavy blow to the political plans of Minister Haim Katz and his associates, and ignited a series of frantic discussions in the party leadership regarding the legal response options available to them.

Following the ruling, assessments arose in the political system that the party leadership is considering bypassing the Likud's internal institutions and filing an appeal or an urgent petition to the District Court, using the services of the movement's legal advisor and its official representative, attorney Ilan Bombach.

Such a move, if it indeed occurs, is met with aggressive opposition from opposing elements within the party. Likud sources clarified unequivocally: if attorney Bombach files a petition tomorrow morning at the direction of Haim Katz to the District Court against the decision of the movement's tribunal – we will turn to the Israel Bar Association's Ethics Committee against him.

According to the opponents, an appeal by the movement's official legal advisor to external judicial instances with the aim of overturning or appealing a decision of the party's internal judicial institution constitutes crossing a red line and is unacceptable from an institutional and ethical perspective, something that is expected to turn the legal battle arena into a focal point of a large-scale professional and party confrontation.