The Supreme Court today (Monday) rejected, by a majority vote, two petitions against the appointment of Major General Roman Gofman to the position of Head of the Mossad. Justices Ofer Grosskopf and Alex Stein believed, contrary to the position of Dafna Barak-Erez, that the petitions should be rejected outright, while the latter believed that the investigation process regarding questions that remained open should continue, and for this purpose, a show-cause order (Tzav Al-Tfai) and an interim injunction should be issued, without ruling anything to the detriment of Major General Gofman.
1+In the ruling, Justices Grosskopf and Stein determined: “Major General Gofman’s conduct in connection with the Almakayes affair is not of a nature that casts a moral flaw upon him, certainly not one that could disqualify him from serving as Head of the Mossad. The claims that Major General Gofman knowingly operated a minor or that he deliberately misled IDF authorities regarding the role of the 210th Division in the Almakayes affair were not substantiated by the evidence presented to the committee; the claim that Major General Gofman ‘abandoned’ individuals who acted on his behalf within the framework of the Almakayes affair is an erroneous claim, stemming from an erroneous presentation of the essence of the affair.”
The primary ruling was written by Justice Grosskopf, who extensively analyzed the relevant normative and factual infrastructure of the petition. In light of this analysis, Justice Grosskopf believed that in this case, the court was required—on the one hand, for reasons relating to the importance of integrity (Tohar HaMidot) for the role of Head of the Mossad, and on the other hand, aspects relating to the work of the Advisory Committee and its outputs—to examine the claims raised against Major General Gofman in connection with the Almakayes affair in an especially meticulous and cautious manner.
Justice Grosskopf’s clear impression from the entirety of the material placed before the committee (and the court), including classified material, is that Major General Gofman’s conduct in connection with the Almakayes affair is not of a nature that casts a moral flaw upon him, certainly not one that could disqualify him from serving as Head of the Mossad.
1+The claims that Major General Gofman knowingly operated a minor or that he deliberately misled IDF authorities regarding the role of the 210th Division in the Almakayes affair were not substantiated by the evidence presented to the committee; the claim that Major General Gofman ‘abandoned’ individuals who acted on his behalf within the framework of the Almakayes affair is an erroneous claim, stemming from an erroneous presentation of the essence of the affair and a disregard for the negligible role of the 210th Division in the security and criminal investigation conducted regarding it; finally, it is undisputed that failures occurred in Major General Gofman’s conduct in connection with the Almakayes affair, and due to this, a disciplinary measure was even taken against him at the time by the then-commander of the Northern Command, yet these failures do not relate to matters of integrity.
The conclusion arising from this is that the extensive material presented to the committee regarding the Almakayes affair demonstrates that it does not tarnish Major General Gofman’s impressive career with a moral stain. As such, it does not justify his disqualification from serving in the position of Head of the Mossad.
Justice Stein joined the conclusion regarding the rejection of the petition. Justice Stein believed that although the collection of evidence by the Senior Officials Appointments Committee was not at its best, it does not constitute a defect that goes to the root of the matter which would bring about the voiding of the decision made by the committee regarding Major General Gofman’s appointment to the position of Head of the Mossad.
Justice Stein therefore confirmed the position of the Senior Officials Committee and ruled that no flaw occurred in Major General Gofman’s actions in the Almakayes affair that amounts to a deviation from integrity. Alongside these determinations, Justice Stein leveled harsh criticism against the baseless accusations leveled at Major General Gofman by the representative of the Movement for Quality Government in its capacity as a “public petitioner.”