Majority of Israelis want a state probe of Oct. 7, think politics preventing one
A large majority of Israelis from across the political spectrum support the foundation of astate commission of inquiry into the events leading up to and including October 7, 2023, according to a poll commissioned by the October Council.
The October Council is a forum of bereaved families who lost loved ones in the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, and has pushed for the formation ofa probe.
Over 73% of Israelis think that an investigation, as it is defined by law, should be formed, according to the poll.
Among right-wing voters, 64% said a state probe should be formed, while only 17% said that another type of probe should be set up by the political echelon.
When looking at religious characteristics, 57% of observant respondents called for a state probe, and just 15.2% of this sector said the political echelon should form a probe. Some 71.6% of traditional Jews supported a probe, and 89.4% of secular Jews supported a probe.
The only group among whom a majority did not support a state probe was the ultra-Orthodox. Almost 30% of this population supports a probe, while 27.8% support another probe decided on by the political echelon. Around 18% say a probe is not needed, while 24.5% say that they don't know.
Asked why they think 'the government is not interested in founding a state commission of inquiry to examine the failure of October 7,' a majority of respondents (64.2%) said it is because of 'political reasons.'
Some 25% said this is because of substantive reasons, and around 10% said they did not know.
Among right-wing voters, 51% said the reasons the government has not established a probe are political. Some 47% of Israelis agreed 'very much' with the statement 'it is important for me that the party I vote for commits to forming a state commission of inquiry,' while 25.8% said that they 'agree somewhat' with this statement. Just 20.4% 'somewhat' did not agree or 'very much' did not agree with this statement.
Some 44.3% of respondents said that if the bereaved families called on the public to join an increased fight for a state inquiry, they would do so. 38.2% said that they would not.
'The survey data confirms what we experience on the ground every day – an overwhelming majority of the Israeli public, across all its sectors, demands to know the truth,' the October Council said.
'This is not a political matter; it is a national and security matter. The government's refusal to establish a state commission of inquiry stems from political considerations, not substantive ones. The public sees this very clearly.'
This type of investigation is the most powerful probe in the legal system and the only type that operates independently of the political echelon. Its members are appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, and it has the power to subpoena witnesses and make personal recommendations regarding individuals.
An inquiry into the events surrounding October 7 has repeatedly been blocked by the political echelon.
The poll, conducted by Midgam for the October Council, was answered by 1,000 people who make up a representative sample, the October Council said.
Eliav Breuer contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
23 minutes ago
- Axios
Netanyahu moves to fire attorney general prosecuting him for corruption
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government unanimously voted Monday to fire Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is currently prosecuting him for corruption. Why it matters: This is the first time an Israeli government has ever voted to fire an attorney general. The move sparked immediate accusations Netanyahu was seeking to protect himself and his aides. In addition to prosecuting Netanyahu in his ongoing trial, Baharav-Miara is also investigating his advisers' alleged Qatar connections. The resolution is one in a series of challenges to Israel's democratic institutions under Netanyahu, which pre-dated the war in Gaza and have continued during it. Yes, but: Before the cabinet vote, the supreme court told the government this procedure for firing the attorney general was inappropriate and made clear it would issue an injunction if it passed. Therefore, the firing will not come into effect until the supreme court rules on the immediate appeals against it. What to watch: While the supreme court is likely to rule against the government, Netanyahu and his loyalists pushed this move to rally their political base, delegitimize the attorney general and put pressure on her to resign. Several cabinet ministers said Baharav-Miara will now be boycotted. She'll no longer be invited to meetings and her legal opinions will be disregarded. The current clash could reignite a constitutional crisis and plunge the country back into the political turmoil that gripped it before the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks. Catch up quick: Netanyahu is standing trial for charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust in three separate cases. He's accused of accepting more than $200,000 in gifts from wealthy businessmen, and of granting regulatory benefits worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a telecom tycoon in exchange for favorable news coverage. He denies those accusations. The trial has stretched on for four years, in part due to Netanyahu's repeated legal delay tactics. The former head of Israel's Shin Bet security agency has accused the prime minister of trying to use executive powers to stall the case. Netanyahu did not participate in the vote to remove Baharav-Miara. What they are saying: Justice Minister Yariv Levin denied on Monday that the decision was connected to Netanyahu's trial and claimed that the government had reached a "red line" in its "confrontational" relationship with the attorney general. Baharv-Miara said in a letter she sent to the cabinet ministers prior to the vote that the unprecedented decision would allow any future government to fire the attorney general for political reasons. She warned that her removal could influence Netanyahu's trial and other criminal investigations against cabinet members.
Fast Company
23 minutes ago
- Fast Company
What to know about Trump's court battle over tariffs
A federal appeals panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of U.S. President Donald Trump 's argument that a 1977 law historically used for sanctioning enemies or freezing their assets gave him the power to impose tariffs. Regardless of how the court rules, the litigation is almost certainly headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about the dispute, which Trump has called 'America's big case,' and how it is likely to play out in the months ahead. What is the case about? The litigation challenges the tariffs Trump imposed on a broad range of U.S. trading partners in April, as well as tariffs imposed in February against China Canada and Mexico. It centers around Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the president the power to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. Trump has said that trade imbalances, declining manufacturing power and the cross-border flow of drugs justified the tariffs under IEEPA. A dozen Democratic-led states and five small U.S. businesses challenging the tariffs argue that IEEPA does not cover tariffs and that the U.S. Constitution grants Congress, not the president, authority over tariffs and other taxes. A loss for Trump would also undermine the latest round of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries that he unveiled late Thursday. Trump has made tariffs a cornerstone of his economic plan, arguing they will promote domestic manufacturing and substitute for income taxes. What's the status of the litigation? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments on Thursday in the case. The panel of 11 judges sharply questioned the government about Trump's use of IEEPA, but did not rule from the bench. The Federal Circuit has not said when it will issue a decision, but its briefing schedule suggests it intends to move quickly. Meanwhile, the tariffs remain in effect after the Federal Circuit paused a lower court's ruling declaring them illegal. Will Trump's tariffs be blocked if he loses in court? A Federal Circuit ruling would almost certainly not end the litigation, as the losing party is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court. If the Federal Circuit rules against Trump, the court could put its own ruling on hold while the government appeals to the Supreme Court. This approach would maintain the status quo and allow the nine justices to consider the matter more thoroughly. The justices themselves could also issue an 'administrative stay' that would temporarily pause the Federal Circuit's decision while it considers a request from the Justice Department for more permanent relief. Is the Supreme Court likely to step in? The Supreme Court is not obligated to review every case appealed to it, but it is widely expected to weigh in on Trump's tariffs because of the weighty constitutional questions at the heart of the case. If the Federal Circuit rules in the coming weeks, there is still time for the Supreme Court to add the case to its regular docket for the 2025-2026 term, which begins on October 6. The Supreme Court could rule before the end of the year, but that would require it to move quickly. How might the Supreme Court rule? There is no consensus among court-watchers about what the Supreme Court will do. Critics of Trump's tariffs are optimistic their side will win. They point to the Supreme Court's decision from 2023 that blocked President Joe Biden from forgiving student loan debt. In that ruling, the justices limited the authority of the executive branch to take action on issues of 'vast economic and political significance' except where Congress has explicitly authorized the action. The justices in other cases, however, have endorsed a broad view of presidential power, especially when it comes to foreign affairs. Can importers seek refunds for tariffs paid? If Trump loses at the Supreme Court, importers are likely to seek refunds of tariffs already paid. This would be a lengthy process given the large number of anticipated claims. Federal regulations dictate that such requests would be first heard by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. If that agency denies a refund request, the importer can appeal to the Court of International Trade. There is precedent for tariff refund requests being granted. Since May, CBP has been processing refunds to importers who inadvertently overpaid duties because of tariff 'stacking' — where multiple overlapping tariffs are applied to the same imports. And in the 1990s, after the Court of International Trade struck down a tax on exporters that was being used to finance improvements to U.S. harbors, the court set up a process for issuing refunds. That decision was upheld by both the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court. Would a courtroom defeat unravel Trump's trade deals? Trump has used the threat of emergency tariffs as leverage to secure concessions from trading partners. A loss at the Supreme Court would hamstring Trump in future negotiations. The White House, however, has other ways of imposing tariffs, like a 1962 law that allows the president to investigate imports that threaten national security. Trump has already used that law to put tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and those levies are not at issue in the case before the Federal Circuit. Some legal experts say a loss for Trump at the Supreme Court would not impact bilateral trade agreements the U.S. has already inked with other countries. Others say that the trade deals alone might not provide sufficient legal authority for taxes on imports and may need to be approved by Congress.
Associated Press
23 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Dozens killed as Palestinians in Gaza scramble for aid from air and land
DEIR AL-BALAH, Gaza Strip (AP) — Dozens of Palestinians were killed or wounded on Monday as desperate crowds headed toward food distribution points and airdropped parcels in the Gaza Strip, according to witnesses and local health officials. Israel's blockade and military offensive have made it nearly impossible to safely deliver aid, contributing to the territory's slide toward famine nearly 22 months into the war with Hamas. Aid groups say Israel's week-old measures to allow more aid in are far from sufficient. Families of hostages in Gaza fear starvation affects them too, but blame Hamas. Several hundred Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire since May while heading toward food distribution sites and aid convoys, according to witnesses, local health officials and the United Nations human rights office. The military says it has only fired warning shots and disputes the toll. As international alarm has mounted, several countries have airdropped aid over Gaza. The U.N. and aid groups call such drops costly and dangerous for residents, and say they deliver far less aid than trucks. AP video shows scramble for airdropped aid Many food parcels dropped by air have splashed into the Mediterranean Sea or landed in so-called red zones from which Israel's military has ordered people to evacuate. In either case, Palestinians risk their lives to get flour and other basic goods. On Monday, Palestinians cheered as pallets of aid were parachuted over Zuweida in central Gaza. Associated Press footage showed a desperate scramble when the parcels hit the ground, with hundreds of people racing toward them. Fistfights broke out and some men wielded batons. 'I wish they would deliver it through the (land) crossings,' Rabah Rabah said earlier as he waited for the airdrop. 'This is inhuman.' At least one parcel fell on a tent where displaced people had been sheltering, injuring a man who was taken to a hospital. His condition was not immediately known. Dozens killed seeking aid At least 16 people were killed late Sunday near the Israeli-controlled Zikim Crossing, the main entry point for aid to northern Gaza, according to records at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, which showed that more than 130 people were wounded. The circumstances were not immediately clear, but the crossing has seen several shootings in recent days that witnesses and health officials blamed on Israeli forces. There was no immediate comment from the military. At least 10 people were killed as thousands waited for aid trucks in the Morag Corridor, which the Israeli military carved out between the southern cities of Khan Younis and Rafah. Mohammed al-Masri, who was among the crowds, said Israeli forces opened fire when a group of young men tried to make their way to the front. 'The occupation forces shot many people in the head and in the back,' he said, adding that he saw four wounded people, one motionless on the ground. Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis said it received 10 bodies from Morag and another five who were killed near an aid site in southern Gaza run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, an Israeli-backed American contractor. GHF said there were no violent incidents at or near its sites. It said a new U.N. route runs near two of its sites in the south and has drawn large crowds of people who unload the convoys. GHF says its contractors have only used pepper spray or fired warning shots on a few occasions to prevent deadly crowding since it opened four sites in May. 'It's a death trap' Al-Awda Hospital in central Gaza said it received the bodies of eight people killed near a GHF site in the Israeli-controlled Netzarim Corridor, and that another 50 people were wounded. Witnesses and health officials said Israeli forces had fired toward the crowds. An Associated Press photo showed a man carrying a body away from the site, as others hauled bags of food. 'It's like yesterday, and the day before,' said Ayman Ruqab, a young Palestinian who said he had tried unsuccessfully to reach the site for the past three days. 'It's a death trap.' The Israeli military said it fired warning shots at people who approached 'in a manner that posed a threat to the troops,' without elaborating. It said it was not aware of any casualties. Hamas-led militants killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducted 251 in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack that ignited the war. They still hold 50 hostages, around 20 of them believed to be alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefires or other deals. Israel's retaliatory military offensive has killed more than 60,900 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. The ministry, which doesn't distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count but says around half the dead have been women and children, is staffed by medical professionals. The U.N. and other independent experts view its figures as the most reliable casualty count. Israel has disputed the figures but hasn't provided its own. ___ Magdy reported from Cairo. ___ Follow AP's war coverage at
