Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly accused the head of the Israel National Security Agency to lie before the country’s superior court, the last turn in a legal battle over Mr. Netanyahu’s attempt to fire the head of security, Ronen Bar.
In an affidavit of 13 scathing pages that defends his decision to eliminate Mr. Bar, who leads Shin’s commitment, Netanyahu sought to refute the impressive accusations that Mr. Bar made against the prime minister in an equally scathing affidavit that Mr. Bar presented last week before the Supreme Court of Israel.
The extraordinary exchange of recriminations occurred as part of a case presented by Israeli surveillance organizations and opposition parties against the decision of Mr. Netanyahu to expel Mr. Bar, with the full approval of his government, citing a lack of confidence between them.
Mr. Bar has said that the decision to eliminate it did not vote for professional considerations, but of “an expectation of personal loyalty.”
The case has started Israel, personifying a long -standing domestic crisis that faces the supporters of Netyahu’s hard line against the most liberal Israelis about the balance of power between the branches of the government and the character of Israeli democracy.
To be able to govern the validity of the expulsion of Mr. Bar, the court could now have to decide which conflicting affidavit is more credible. Alternatively, judges could fight for a commitment, with an agreed date for Mr. Bar to give up.
Mr. Bar had accused Mr. Netanyahu or stop personal loyalty over respect for the decisions of the Supreme Court in case a constitutional crisis occurs. Hey also said that the prime minister had pressed for the inappropriate use of the powers of the Shin Bet to spy on Israeli citizens who had directed or financed anti -government protests.
Mr. Bar said that he had asked him for an opinion that signed an opinion, written by Mr. Netanyahu or his AIDS and, according to what Mr. Bar suggested, were spurious security arguments, which would have hindered the progress of an ongoing corruption trial that involves the prime minister. Mr. Netanyahu is accused of bribery, fraud and non -compliance with trust, accused or providing regulatory favorite rich followers in exchange for illicit gifts and favorable media coverage. In his own affidavit, Mr. Netanyahu rejected those statements, using his authority to support some of his arguments with selected appointments of transcripts of confidential meetings and reports that would normally qualify for decades.
Regarding his trial, Mr. Netanyahu said that he had simply asked Mr. Bar to provide an urgent security plan for his protection while testifying in court after Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia, launched a drone that damaged the Netanyahu family house in the Israeli coastal city of Cés.
Mr. Netanyahu argued that he did not want to delay the testimony, but only the courts to be transferred to a safer location.
He described the statement that Mr. Bar was asked to spy on the leaders of legitimate protests as “a complete lie”, saying that he was only concerned about cases of violence and harassment of public figures. By going back to Mr. Bar, Mr. Netanyahu accused the pimp of not having repairs about the presentation of its authorities when it came to chasing the extreme right activists.
Netanyahu did not explicitly denied Mr. Bar’s claims about the demand for loyalty in case of a constitutional shock between the Supreme Court and the Government, but Mr. Netanyahu said that Mr. Bar had written the complaint differently in the classified part of his statement of presentation.
In a detailed response on Sunday, issued hours after Mr. Netanyahu launched his affidavit, Bar said he was “plagued with inaccuracies, inclined quotes and half truths destined to distort the context and alter reality.”
Mr. Bar had tracked the loss of confidence of Mr. Netanyahu and the desire to say again to a series of movements that the Security Chief made at the end of 2024 and early 2025, including his decision to investigate the Netyahu attendees suspected of security violations in cases involved in the departure of the classification.
Mr. Netanyahu holds in his affidavit that he lost all the confidence in Mr. Bar on October 7, 2023, when Hamas set up his deadly surprise attack against the south of Israel, lighting the devastating War in Gaza. Kaging Mr. Bar for not providing or preventing the attack, Mr. Netanyahu said it was an answer for what he called “the greatest failure of intelligence in the history of Israel.”
Mr. Netanyahu wrote: “He would have to rub the eyes to believe” the recommendations issued by Mr. Bar shortly before the attack, after some worrying signs of Hamas activity in Gaza.
Mr. Bar had advised against any broad Israeli action that could lead to a “calculation error,” Netanyahu revealed, sticking to what he described as a security security concept of “preserving tranquility in Gaza at any price.” (Mr. Netanyahu had also been signed for a long time to this policy, according to Mr. Bar).
“While Ronen Bar was prevention actions for fear of activating a war, Hamas had already begun a war!” Mr. Netanyahu wrote in his affidavit.
Mr. Netanyahu also rejected Mr. Bar’s claim that he had warned about the war in the year before the attack led by Hamas, citing fragments of meetings transcripts and intelligence reports in which Bar said that Gaza was “deterred” and that Hamas leaders did not seek to start a war.
Mr. Bar had said long before Mr. Netanyahu’s decision to fire him that he would resign to resign at an appropriate time as part of the responsibility of the intelligence failure bar.
