Israeli Cabinet Votes No Confidence Against Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara

Israel’s cabinet passed a vote of no confidence against Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara on Sunday, with the justice minister saying it was “a first step in the removal of yet another vocal critic of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government.”

“Israel’s cabinet has passed a vote of no confidence against Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, the country’s justice minister has said, in a first step in the removal of yet another vocal critic of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right government”

Al Jazeera

The vote came “just two days after the government dismissed Ronen Bar, the head of Shin Bet, the country’s internal security agency,” a decision later frozen by the Supreme Court.

Al Jazeera

Al Jazeera reported that the Israeli government “unanimously voted to express a vote of no confidence” in Baharav-Ma’ara during a session she did not attend, and that the government would “proceed with her removal proceedings.”

In the same Al Jazeera account, Baharav-Ma’ara had sent a message refusing to hold the session, stressing that the meeting “lacked any legal standing.”

The Times of Israel said the prime minister himself was not present during the debate and vote “due to his conflict-of-interest agreement that blocks him from any moves that could affect his ongoing criminal trial,” and that Baharav-Miara “also did not attend the meeting, opting instead to send a letter to ministers.”

The Jerusalem Post described the vote as “launching a highly controversial dismissal proceeding,” and said the next step would be hearings before a statutory advisory committee chaired by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Asher Grunis.

Across the reporting, the vote did not immediately end Baharav-Miara’s role: Al Jazeera said “The vote does not translate into her dismissal yet,” and a committee would review the arguments and hold a hearing to consider the case.

The cabinet’s moves unfolded as Israel “resumes its military operations in the Gaza Strip,” according to Al-Monitor, and the political conflict was framed by multiple outlets as widening divisions while the war continued.

Al Jazeera said the attempted dismissal of both the Shin Bet chief and the attorney general “has attracted thousands of protesters who say the unprecedented moves are a threat to democracy and part of a crackdown on the few remaining voices critical of Netanyahu.”

Al-Monitor

Al-Monitor linked the widening divisions directly to the Gaza context, stating that “The unprecedented moves to dismiss the Shin Bet chief and now the attorney general have widened divisions in the country as Israel resumes its military operations in the Gaza Strip.”

The Times of Israel described the no-confidence motion as occurring “at the most sensitive time, a time of emergency, anti-government protests, and an election period,” and it quoted Baharav-Miara’s argument that the motion was aimed at “loyalty to the political echelon, not governability but rather unlimited regime power.”

In that same Times of Israel account, Baharav-Miara said her office and the legal advisory system had assisted the government with “hundreds of pieces of legislation and hundreds of government resolutions — a form of executive action — and represented the government in over 2,000 petitions,” including “regarding humanitarian aid policy to Gaza, administrative detention, and other controversial policies.”

The Jerusalem Post similarly tied the dispute to the war and governance apparatus by noting that the attorney general “leads the country’s law enforcement apparatus and as such oversees the trial,” while the prime minister’s criminal trial and conflict-of-interest agreement constrained his participation.

Al Jazeera also described the government’s justification for the vote, saying Baharav-Miara is accused of “inappropriate behaviour” and “ongoing substantial differences of opinion between the government and the attorney general, which prevents effective collaboration.”

The dispute over Baharav-Miara’s role centered on competing claims about legality, loyalty, and the government’s intent.

Al Jazeera said the prime minister’s office accused Baharav-Miara of “inappropriate behaviour” and “ongoing substantial differences of opinion between the government and the attorney general, which prevents effective collaboration,” while also noting that she “did not attend the cabinet meeting” and “refuted the claims and accused the government of trying to operate above the law.”

The Times of Israel quoted Baharav-Miara’s letter to the cabinet, saying the no-confidence motion was “legally irrelevant and would have no bearing on the government’s efforts to remove her from office,” and it added that she argued the government misunderstood the Attorney General’s Office as a legal boundary-setter rather than a political tool.

In that account, Baharav-Miara said, “When the legal advice system presents the government with the boundaries of the law, it is doing its job, and it cannot be claimed that these are differences of opinion that are grounds for dismissal.”

The Times of Israel also included Baharav-Miara’s charge that the motion sought “loyalty to the political echelon, not governability but rather unlimited regime power, as part of a broader process to weaken the judicial branch and deter the entire professional echelon.”

The Jerusalem Post reported that Justice Minister Yariv Levin called her refusal to attend “another proof of the depth of her contempt towards the government and its members, and of her lack of answers to the claims against her,” and Levin urged her to resign.

The Jerusalem Post also quoted Opposition Leader MK Yair Lapid saying, “After being investigated, Netanyahu tried to fire his interrogator, and today, the defendant [Netanyahu] wants to fire his prosecutor [Baharav-Miara]. This is illegal, this is corrupt, this will not pass,” framing the move as an attempt to undermine accountability.

The cabinet vote triggered mass demonstrations and intensified political pressure, with multiple outlets describing protesters gathering in Jerusalem and elsewhere while the government moved forward with dismissal proceedings.

The Times of Israel said protesters gathered in Jerusalem “for a sixth consecutive day of demonstrations against plans to dismiss both Baharav-Miara and Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar, and in favor of a deal to secure the release of hostages held in Gaza.”

Haaretz

It added that the rally came “a day afterwell over 100,000 people protestedin Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and dozens of other cities across Israel on Saturday night,” and it described the scale as “far more than at recent rallies” as anger over “the government’s resumption of fighting in Gaza and the planned firing of Baharv-Miara and Bar” boiled over.

The Times of Israel also named former Shin Ber chief Ami Ayalon as set to address protesters, along with retired Supreme Court justice Ayala Procaccia.

Al Jazeera reported that “thousands of Israelis demonstrated outside the Israeli government’s offices to protest the dismissal of the legal adviser Baharav-Ma’ara and Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar,” and it said National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir had “repeatedly called for Baharav-Ma’ara’s removal from her post.”

In Al Jazeera’s account, former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon warned that the government’s decision “reflects a shift toward an authoritarian system,” and it said Netanyahu’s position was strengthened by “the return of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir to the government.”

Al-Monitor described scuffles with police during demonstrations outside parliament and the prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem, stating that “hundreds of protesters demonstrated outside parliament and the prime minister's residence in Jerusalem, leading to scuffles with police.”

The sources describe a long and contested process for removing Baharav-Miara, with hearings, committee composition, and potential court challenges shaping what comes next.

Al Jazeera said “A committee will review the arguments and hold a hearing to consider the case,” and it warned that “Should the committee fail to support her removal, the Supreme Court could still block it,” while also stating that “The vote does not translate into her dismissal yet.”

Roya News

The Jerusalem Post specified that the next step will be for the A-G to attend “a hearing or series of hearings in front of a statutory advisory committee chaired by former Supreme Court Chief Justice Asher Grunis,” and it said the process “could take months.”

It also described committee membership details, stating that “In addition to Grunis, it currently includes Adv. Tammy Olman” and “law professor Ron Shapira,” and that it “currently lacks two members: a former justice minister or former attorney-general and a current Member of the Knesset.”

The Jerusalem Post added that “No former attorney-general has agreed to take on the role,” and it reported that Haaretz said Justice Minister Yariv Levin would attempt to appoint Knesset Speaker MK Amir Ohana, while noting that this appointment is “unlikely to pass a challenge in the High Court.”

Al Jazeera also emphasized that the attempted dismissal of Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar had already been frozen by the Supreme Court, and it said the prime minister cited an “ongoing lack of trust” in Bar, who is expected to testify on “April 8.”

The Times of Israel reported that retired Supreme Court justices published a letter warning against firing Baharav-Miara, and it quoted them saying dismissing her “would seriously endanger the State of Israel’s status as a nation of laws founded on sound governance and administration.”