The Supreme Court was tasked with deciding on the security of The Democrats party chairman, Major General (res. ) Yair Golan, and has ordered the head of the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), the Ministerial Committee for Shin Bet Affairs, and the government to immediately evaluate the need for his protection. The decision follows an urgent petition filed by Golan and his party, seeking court orders to mandate state-provided security in light of a series of threats to his life.
According to Channel 13, the petitioners emphasized the timing near the election and the tangible fear of physical harm. The petition included an official document from the head of the threatened persons department at the Israel Police, which identifies a rise in Golan's risk level to 4 out of 6—a level identical to that of MK Gadi Eisenkot, for whom security was granted. It was alleged that prior to the filing, three written requests sent to authorities, including the head of the Shin Bet directly, received no substantive response.
The petitioners included details of unusual incidents, including a brick thrown at Channel 12 news studios accompanied by a specific threat letter aimed at Golan, alongside incitement on social media calling for violence against him and his family. The party's CEO, Omer Lubaton-Granot, complained of what he termed a significant security and moral failure. In a broader context, it was noted that the Public Advisory Committee for VIP Security had previously supported security for MK Eisenkot but has yet to issue a clear decision on Golan.
Reports suggest that the implementation of the security for Eisenkot was delayed by various factors, with committee chairman Ronen Cohen allegedly involved in the delay. The practical implication of the High Court's ruling is that security officials must re-assess the situation based on current intelligence and provide an update to the court within two days. As of now, the petition reflects Golan's claims regarding the security failure, with final authority on the need for protection remaining with the competent authorities following a re-examination per the judges' instructions.