Opposition leaders vowed to establish a state commission of inquiry into government failures surrounding the October 7 attacks immediately after the upcoming elections, as bereaved families and right-wing activists clashed outside the High Court during a Thursday hearing on petitions demanding such a probe.
At the beginning of the hearing, government representative Michael Rabello told the judges that an investigation into the October 7 massacre should begin only after “victory on all fronts.” He claimed that it was still not yet time to conduct the probe.
Former prime minister Naftali Bennett, whose party has been trailing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party in recent polls, sharply criticized Rabello’s statement.
“Anyone who says ‘later’ about investigating the October 7 massacre means ‘never,” Bennett responded.
He vowed that a government led by him would establish a state commission of inquiry immediately upon its formation. He added that, as long as a government led by Netanyahu were to be in power, there would be no chance of the establishment of a state commission of inquiry.
During the hearing, High Court justices raised the possibility that it may be better to postpone an investigation into the attacks until after the upcoming elections, set for no later than October 2026, which would allow the public to determine how it should be conducted.
State probe 'the only way to uncover the truth,' opposition leader says
Opposition leader Yair Lapid (Yesh Atid) accused the government of being afraid that the truth behind the attacks would be exposed.
“A state commission of inquiry is the only way to uncover the truth, learn the lessons, and prevent the next disaster,” he added.
Former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot and leader of the Yashar! Party criticized the government for creating a situation where bereaved family members would clash two days after the country marked Remembrance Day.
He also claimed that Netanyahu is “once again receiving clear warnings from the military leadership and ignoring them,” and that Hamas was already rebuilding in the Gaza Strip.
Eisenkot also warned that, without a state commission of inquiry, another massacre cannot be prevented, and that Israeli citizens deserve to know the truth about the attacks.
MK Benny Gantz, leader of the Blue and White Party, addressed the fact that the clashes were taking place directly after Remembrance Day, calling them “heartbreaking.”
Gantz called for elections to establish a broad, Zionist unity government that would “stop the civil strife and break down the divisions.”
Leader of the Yisrael Beytenu Party, MK Avigdor Liberman, along with the leader of the left-wing Democrats Party, Yair Golan, both stated that the establishment of a state commission of inquiry into October 7 would be the first decision made in the next government.
A state commission of inquiry is considered the most authoritative and independent investigative system under Israeli law. It operates entirely outside the political echelon, with members appointed by the Supreme Court’s chief justice, and has the power to subpoena witnesses and issue personal recommendations regarding individuals.
Bereaved families, right-wing activists protest outside courtroom
Coalition politicians expressed their strong opposition to a state commission of inquiry.
Amid the ongoing rift between the government and the judiciary, Netanyahu has repeatedly spoken out against judicial appointments leading the investigation.
There has been a divide over what kind of investigation should be conducted and who should lead it. More than two and a half years on, no agreement has been reached, and no investigation has been carried out.
Bereaved families and right-wing activists demonstrated outside the courtroom against a state commission of inquiry, with some attempting to force their way into the courtroom after being denied entry.
Other bereaved families have held the opposite stance, pushing for a state commission of inquiry and arguing that no other type of probe would ensure justice.
The October Council, which represents bereaved family members of the attacks, has repeatedly demanded a state commission of inquiry.
The forum stated during the hearing that the government has been evading for more than two and a half years the “most basic responsibility to its citizens,” by not conducting such a probe.
“We reiterate and make clear: a state commission of inquiry, as defined by law, will be established,” they said.
Lapid argued that opposition to a state commission of inquiry stems from “incitement by Netanyahu and his ministers against the Supreme Court.”
The prime minister is among the few major officials who have not resigned following the October 7 massacre. The political echelon has repeatedly blocked a state inquiry into the events surrounding the attacks, despite polls showing broad public support for this type of investigation.
Netanyahu had called to wait on conducting investigations into the attacks during the Israel-Hamas war, stating that it was necessary to focus only on war goals at the time.
Shortly after the ceasefire deal in October 2025, the government began advancing a controversial bill to create a politically appointed investigation committee.
The make-up of the bill differs from the traditional state commission of inquiry mechanism set out in the 1968 Commissions of Inquiry Law.
Under the framework laid out in the government-backed bill, Supreme Court appointments would be replaced by members selected through a Knesset-led process.
The commission would comprise six members, according to the bill. Lawmakers would first be given a limited period to reach an agreement on all appointments in a vote requiring a supermajority of 80 Knesset members.
If no agreement were reached in the supermajority vote, the coalition and the opposition would each appoint three members to the committee.
However, if the opposition refuses to participate, a scenario widely viewed as likely, Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana (Likud) would be empowered to select who would be in the opposition’s slots – an aspect of the bill that is considered highly controversial.
In February, Netanyahu released a 55-page document that outlined the answers he gave to State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman as part of the investigation into October 7.
The prime minister’s answers point to failures among officials in the security establishment, deflecting his role in the outcome of the attacks.