Current and former Likud lawmakers, ministers, and deputy ministers will remain barred from competing for district positions in the party’s upcoming primary, after MK Afif Abed withdrew his Supreme Court appeal late Wednesday night.
The outcome closes one part of a weeks-long struggle over how the Likud will choose its next Knesset list, a process repeatedly reshaped by party votes, internal petitions, and court proceedings.
It does not affect the eight positions that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been authorized to fill with candidates of his choosing. The primary vote is currently scheduled for Monday.
The case concerned a separate question: whether current and former MKs, ministers, and deputy ministers could compete for places on the list reserved for candidates from geographic districts.
Abed’s attorney informed the Supreme Court that he would no longer pursue the appeal after the justices heard the parties’ arguments, according to the two-page judgment issued Wednesday night.
Court formally dismisses appeal
The court formally dismissed the appeal; the panel comprised justices Daphne Barak-Erez, Ofer Grosskopf, and Alex Stein.
Meaning, the internal tribunal’s ruling remains in force, and current and former officeholders cannot use the district route in the upcoming primary – they will have to compete on the nationwide slate.
During the hearing, the justices repeatedly questioned why an external court should intervene in a decision by the party’s own judicial body. Grosskopf said the Likud tribunal was responsible for deciding internal disputes and that its decisions should ordinarily be respected.
The appeal was the latest proceeding in a broader struggle over the balance of power between Netanyahu, Likud members, and the party’s internal institutions.
Three connected but distinct questions have dominated the process: whether the primary would take place, how much of the list Netanyahu could determine himself, and who would be allowed to compete for district positions.
Likud’s Knesset list is assembled from several different contests and guarantees. The party chairman heads the slate, while eligible Likud members vote for candidates competing in a nationwide race.
Separate places are allocated to representatives of geographic districts and groups guaranteed representation under the party rules. Other positions are reserved for candidates selected by the party chairman.
The district route has traditionally provided a path onto the list for local activists and first-time candidates who lack the national recognition and political organization of serving lawmakers. Opening those contests to established politicians would have given current and former officeholders an alternative to the crowded nationwide race.
The first major dispute concerned whether the primary would be held at all.
In June, the Likud Constitution Committee set the primary for August 4 amid reports that Netanyahu had considered replacing it with a committee that would appoint the party list instead.
Netanyahu considers replacing committee
During a series of meetings in July, Likud institutions considered a broader overhaul that included eight reserved positions for Netanyahu, a possible alternative to the primary in a security emergency, and a separate proposal opening the district contests to current and former officeholders.
By mid-July, the primary had been moved from August 4 to August 17 as the internal deliberations continued.
A vote on the proposed rules was halted on July 16 after the Central District Court in Lod issued a temporary injunction requiring the party to address a competing proposal before proceeding.
The Constitution Committee subsequently approved a revised framework under which Netanyahu would receive eight reserved positions and could appoint a selection committee if a security escalation made it impossible to hold the primary.
The Likud’s top internal court struck down the latter provision over the weekend before the July 27 vote. It ruled that the party was required to exhaust the available means of holding a primary rather than approve its cancellation in advance.
The tribunal said a security emergency could justify changing the date and suggested that the party prepare for electronic voting if necessary. It left open the possibility of considering an unforeseen emergency if one arose.
The decision therefore blocked the proposed selection committee, leaving a party primary as the operative method for choosing the list.
On July 27, members of the Likud convention voted on the remaining rules, approving the eight positions for Netanyahu by a wide margin, and narrowly approving the separate proposal allowing current and former officeholders to compete in the districts.
The district result was immediately challenged before the Likud tribunal. Petitioners argued that opening the districts to established politicians would undermine their traditional purpose and that irregularities in the voting and counting made it impossible to determine whether the narrowly approved proposal had passed lawfully.
The tribunal found discrepancies involving the numbers of recorded voters, envelopes, and ballots at several polling stations. It did not find that the result had been deliberately falsified, but concluded that the irregularities could not be disregarded given the narrow margin.
The tribunal also reasoned that district positions were intended to provide a relatively protected contest in which new leadership could emerge. Serving politicians, it said, enter the race with advantages in public recognition, media exposure, and political organization.
On August 3, the tribunal invalidated the district change. The rest of the framework, including Netanyahu’s eight reserved positions, remained intact.
Abed, who sought to compete in the Galilee and Valleys district, then challenged the ruling in the Tel Aviv District Court.
He argued that the tribunal had exceeded its authority by replacing the decision of the Likud convention with its own view of who should be allowed to compete. Questions about the composition of the party list, he maintained, belonged to the Likud’s elected institutions.
Judge Yaakov Shaked accepted that argument in part.
Shaked ruled that the tribunal had exceeded its authority when it overturned the party’s policy choice on the grounds that allowing established politicians into the district contests violated equality. He found that the Likud constitution did not itself prohibit current or former officeholders from competing in the districts.
However, Shaked declined to interfere with the tribunal’s separate assessment of the problems in the July 27 vote. He ruled that civil courts should generally avoid second-guessing an internal party tribunal’s factual findings unless exceptional circumstances justify intervention.
The District Court therefore dismissed Abed’s case on Monday, leaving the restriction in place despite accepting part of his argument about the limits of the tribunal’s authority.
Abed appealed to the Supreme Court the following day. The court convened an expedited hearing on Wednesday night because of the approaching primary.
By withdrawing the appeal, Abed left both the District Court judgment and the practical result of the tribunal’s ruling intact.
The decision does not affect the separate process through which Netanyahu is allocating his reserved positions, which has continued through the Likud Secretariat and the party tribunal.
The primary remains scheduled for Monday. Under the rules now in force, eligible Likud members will vote in the nationwide and district contests, current and former officeholders will remain outside the district races, and Netanyahu will retain his authority to select candidates for eight reserved positions.
Keshet Neev contributed to this report.