Supreme Court ruled: 180 Shin Bet veterans who petitioned against Zini's appointment must provide him with their names
The Supreme Court President suggested that Zini reconsider his demand for the disclosure of the names, but the Shin Bet head was not convinced. The Supreme Court ruled again that those who petitioned anonymously must reveal their identities, while stopping short of determining whether they were in contempt of court for failing to comply with the previous order.
The Supreme Court ruled again that the Shin Bet veterans who petitioned anonymously against the appointment of David Zini as head of the service must provide him with their names within a week. However, the Court emphasized that it did not decide whether those veterans were in contempt of court when they did not comply with its previous order to provide their names.
In a hearing held last month, the protocol of which was revealed this week, Supreme Court President Isaac Amit asked Zini to waive this right to disclose their names:
"The head of the service would do well to reconsider his position; it is not certain that this does him any good."
The hearing was held regarding a request for contempt of court, after the Shin Bet veterans who petitioned against Zini's appointment did not comply with the Supreme Court's decision to publish their names. 180 former Shin Bet personnel filed petitions against Zini's appointment, but their petition was rejected and Zini was appointed to the position. After the verdict, the head of the Shin Bet filed a request with the Supreme Court to reveal the names of the petitioners who filed anonymously. The Supreme Court accepted the request and ruled that Zini has the right to review the list.
Despite the decision, the Shin Bet personnel refused to provide the names. Zini, through his representative, attorney Ohad Shalem, filed a request for contempt of court. During the hearing, the representative of the Shin Bet personnel, attorney Eitan Peleg, argued that the court did not issue a mandatory order to disclose the names, and therefore it cannot be determined that they are violating the decision. Zini's lawyer, Yaakov Kerem, replied that the Supreme Court's decision was clear and demanded that the judges issue an order that is not subject to any other interpretation.
During the hearing, President Amit asked Zini's representative that, even though the law requires the disclosure of the petitioners' names as the Supreme Court ruled in this and other cases, it would be better for the head of the Shin Bet to waive his rights. Zini's representative clarified that he insists on the rights of the head of the Shin Bet and on the fulfillment of the Supreme Court's decision to publish the names.
