Supreme Court Rejects Challenges to New Shin Bet Head Zini

Israel’s High Court of Justice on Monday rejected petitions challenging the government’s appointment of Maj.-Gen. (res.) David Zini as head of the Shin Bet, effectively cementing his position at the helm of the country’s domestic security agency.

The court ruled by a two-to-one majority that there was no legal basis to intervene in the appointment, which was approved by the government on September 30 following a review by the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee, known as the Grunis Committee. Zini formally assumed the role on October 5, after earlier requests to freeze the appointment were denied.

Writing for the majority, Deputy Supreme Court President Noam Sohlberg said the claims raised by petitioners, including allegations concerning Zini’s integrity and ethical conduct, did not justify judicial review. He emphasized that the Grunis Committee’s conclusions carried decisive weight and noted that established case law requires courts to exercise extreme caution when reviewing senior government appointments.

According to Sohlberg, once an appointment mechanism has been approved by the government, vetted by the relevant advisory committee, and accepted by legal authorities, judicial intervention is warranted only in exceptional circumstances. Justice David Mintz joined the majority opinion, echoing the view that reopening the appointment process would undermine prior legal agreements that had already resolved questions regarding conflicts of interest.

Only Supreme Court President Isaac Amit dissented. He argued that the process raised substantive difficulties that merited further scrutiny. In his view, the government should have been required to explain why the appointment should not be returned to the Grunis Committee for reconsideration.

Amit focused on the scope of the committee’s review, saying it examined Zini’s personal suitability but failed to adequately consider broader ethical concerns related to the appointment process itself, including the conduct of the appointing authority. He wrote that the absence of a thorough examination of those issues left the committee’s decision without a sufficient factual and legal foundation.

The ruling ends weeks of legal uncertainty surrounding the appointment, which came amid heightened political and institutional tensions. Petitioners had argued that the process was flawed and that potential conflicts of interest were not fully addressed. The attorney general, while acknowledging legal difficulties in the appointment, ultimately concluded there was no legal obstacle to Zini’s selection.

With the court’s decision, Zini will continue to serve as head of the Shin Bet without restriction. The judgment also reinforces the judiciary’s longstanding reluctance to intervene in senior security appointments, underscoring the high threshold required for court involvement in decisions made by the political and professional echelons.