Israel's 7 October Inquiry Can Proceed Without New Government

Israelis are still reeling from the 7 October massacre, with many questioning the government's handling of the crisis and the subsequent release of hostages. Lieutenant Colonel (Res.) Dr Amir Blumenfeld, who worked with the families of hostages during their captivity, believes a credible investigation is essential to rebuilding trust in Israel's leaders and institutions. He argues that an independent, comprehensive national inquiry into what happened is long overdue.

Blumenfeld's organisation, SAHAR, provides online emotional support to those affected by the massacre. He believes that a state commission of inquiry could help separate facts from competing political accounts and provide a shared understanding of the events leading up to and during the massacre. Gadi Eisenkot, the former IDF chief of staff, has announced plans to introduce legislation to establish a state commission of inquiry, which could be taken forward by the Knesset.

The Knesset can establish a state commission of inquiry through the State Control Committee, which requires an appropriate comptroller's report and committee support. Alternatively, lawmakers could change the law to allow for a commission to be established. Professor Barak Medina believes that the Knesset has the power to enact such a law, which would specify what investigators must examine. This could include examining the conduct of the war and political responsibility.

A previous attempt to establish a commission failed in July, when Netanyahu's coalition rejected a similar bill from Yesh Atid MK Meir Cohen. However, Medina considers the election results and the government's caretaker status sufficient grounds for a new proposal to be brought forward. The outgoing government remains in office until a successor takes over, but its caretaker status limits its freedom to act.

Eisenkot's party, Yashar, won 21 seats in the election, making it the second-largest party after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud. However, it is unclear whether Eisenkot will follow Cohen's model for establishing a commission or propose a new approach. Medina expects Eisenkot to try forming a government and turn to legislation if that effort fails.

For Blumenfeld, the cost of waiting for an inquiry extends beyond politics. He argues that establishing the facts, understanding what went wrong, and acknowledging responsibility are necessary first steps towards rebuilding trust and beginning the healing process in Israeli society. A state commission of inquiry can compel testimony and documents, identify failures, and recommend changes, but it cannot convict anyone of a crime.

Not all bereaved families agree on the approach to an inquiry, with some opposing the judiciary-appointed model. However, Blumenfeld believes that the process must be one that Israelis across the political spectrum can recognise as fair and credible. The inquiry's findings may not convince everyone, but its process can help rebuild a shared future.

Key points

• The Knesset can establish a state commission of inquiry into 7 October failures without waiting for a new government.
• A state commission of inquiry can compel testimony and documents, identify failures, and recommend changes.
• The inquiry's process must be fair and credible to help rebuild trust and a shared future in Israeli society.