The Jerusalem District Court on Monday ordered National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir to promote Israel Police Supt. Rinat Saban to the rank of chief superintendent, ruling that his prolonged refusal to do so was unlawful, tainted by extraneous considerations, and harmful to the independence of the police.
In a sweeping ruling, Judge David Gidoni wrote that Ben-Gvir must approve Saban’s promotion retroactively to the date she completed the required senior command course, and he ordered the minister to pay NIS 20,000 in compensation.
The judgment brings to a close months of litigation surrounding Ben-Gvir’s refusal to advance Saban alongside her peers despite unanimous professional backing from police command and repeated warnings from legal authorities that the delay raised a serious concern of political interference.
At the heart of the dispute was Saban’s tangential involvement, years earlier, in investigations connected to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, including Case 4000 and probes into several of his close advisers.
Saban, a 24-year veteran of the Israel Police, has served for over a year as assistant to the head of the Investigations and Intelligence Division, a position designated for an officer holding the rank of chief superintendent.
Ben-Gvir approved Saban's appointment in 2024
In October 2024, the police command staff unanimously recommended her appointment. Ben-Gvir formally approved her assignment to the post in December 2024, and she began serving in the role on January 1, 2025.
Because no police command course was scheduled at the time, Saban – along with two other officers – was sent to an equivalent senior command course run by the Israel Prison Service, with the approval of police leadership. She completed the course between March and April 2025, graduating with a final score of 95.
Her two colleagues were promoted upon completion. Saban was not.
According to the ruling, no explanation was provided at the time. Only months later, after repeated inquiries by senior police officials and deputies to Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara, did Ben-Gvir articulate objections – citing alleged deficiencies tied to Saban’s conduct as a junior officer during the 2019 investigation of Netanyahu’s advisers and her testimony years later as a defense witness in Case 4000.
Gidoni rejected each of the minister’s arguments in detail, finding that they bore no relevance to the promotion decision and were raised selectively and belatedly.
The court emphasized that Saban had been a junior officer at the time of the investigations, acted under instructions from superiors and legal advisers, and was never the subject of disciplinary or command proceedings.
Judicial criticism in those cases, the ruling noted, was directed at systemic investigative practices, not at Saban personally.
The court further rejected Ben-Gvir’s reliance on excerpts from Saban’s testimony, noting that officers routinely testify years after events, often without preparation, and that answers reflecting a lack of recollection are commonplace and carry no professional stigma.
Particularly troubling to the court was the fact that none of the minister’s concerns had been raised during the promotion process itself, despite the fact that all relevant materials, including performance evaluations and assessment scores, had been before him when he approved her appointment to the role.
“The minister’s conduct amounts to a prolonged avoidance of decision-making,” Gidoni wrote, adding that a discretionary authority cannot be transformed into a tool for indefinite delay when all professional bodies are in agreement.
The ruling situates the case within a broader institutional context, citing concerns raised by the attorney-general in parallel High Court proceedings over Ben-Gvir’s involvement in police operations and appointments.
In an advisory position submitted to the High Court this week, Baharav-Miara warned that the minister’s conduct in police appointments risked undermining the force’s independence and could deter officers from investigating politically sensitive cases.
The court noted that Saban’s case had been cited explicitly by the attorney-general as an example of unlawful interference.
“Singling out an officer for scrutiny due to her involvement in investigations concerning senior political figures sends a chilling message to law enforcement,” the ruling stated, warning of damage to public trust and to the rule of law.
Ben-Gvir responded with a blistering statement attacking the judiciary.
“There are no judges in Jerusalem,” he said, accusing the court itself of acting out of “foreign considerations.” He argued that an investigator involved in “illegal investigations” should be dismissed, not promoted, and said the ruling proved the need for immediate judicial reform.
Later on Monday, Ben-Gvir addressed the ruling while speaking at the annual conference of the Professors’ Forum for National Resilience in Jerusalem, attended by cabinet ministers, lawmakers, academics, and senior security officials. Ben-Gvir received notice of the court’s decision during his speech and responded by saying that the ruling reflected an attempt to reduce ministers to “potted plants” with no real authority.
“They think a minister’s role is to be a decorative stamp,” he said. “I didn’t come to this office to be a rubber stamp. I appoint appointments; that is my job. A minister is not a potted plant. We will fight this in the Supreme Court. This ruling proves exactly what I’ve been saying; they want us cutting ribbons at ceremonies.”
The court dismissed these claims outright, noting that no authority – judicial, disciplinary, or professional – had ever found wrongdoing on Saban’s part and that Ben-Gvir’s framing was unsupported by the record.
Beyond Saban’s personal case, the ruling carries broader implications for civil-military relations and the boundaries of ministerial authority over law enforcement.
“The minister is not a ‘super commissioner,’” Gidoni wrote, echoing Supreme Court precedent. While the national security minister holds formal authority over senior appointments, that power, the court stressed, must be exercised lawfully, reasonably, and without political motivation.
By ordering the promotion to take effect retroactively, the ruling seeks not only to remedy harm to Saban but to send what it described as a clear signal that the independence of police investigations, including those involving the political echelon, cannot be compromised.