The following is a sequence of events that led to the government's decisions regarding the appointment of the council "Incoming".

14. On June 24,2025, the Minister of Communications contacted dozens of organizations and bodies in order to locate relevant candidates for the position of council members. After a number of organizations responded to his request, the minister formulated a list of 33 potential candidates.  Afterwards, the Minister of Communications again contacted a number of organizations and bodies and asked for their position regarding the list he had formulated.  Subsequently, the Minister worked to locate more candidates, and on September 17,2025, he asked for the position of the advisory bodies regarding four additional candidates.
15. After a list of candidates was formulated by the Minister of Communications, the Legal Bureau of the Ministry of Communications examined the candidates and their compliance with the prerequisites for the position. At the end of the examination, legal opinions were submitted to the Appointments Review Committee and the Minister of Communications regarding 15 candidates who were found to meet the conditions of eligibility to serve as members of the Council, and which included certain qualifications regarding some of them.  Thus, for example, in the opinion in the case of Dr.  Ben Hai-Segev, it was noted, inter alia, that since 2021 she has served as a director on behalf of the Second Authority on the Board of Directors of News 13 Ltd., the news company of Reshet Media Ltd.  (hereinafter: News 13 and Reshet, respectively); and that a conflict of interest arrangement should be established for Dr.  Ben-Hai-Segev, according to which she will refrain from dealing with any matter related to the network in general, and Channel 13 News in particular, for a period of six months from the moment she is appointed as chairperson of the council.  In this context, it was further emphasized that the Second Authority regulates two major television franchises - Keshet Broadcasting Network and Ltd.  (hereinafter: Keshet Broadcasting) - so that a decision regarding one of the franchises is likely to affect the other as well.  Therefore, it was noted in the opinion that Dr.  Ben-Hai-Segev will be barred from working in the field of television broadcasting during the first six months of her term.  In the meantime, and given that television broadcasts constitute more than half of the Council's work, it was determined that for this period it would be necessary to appoint a substitute from among the other members of the Council.  It was further noted that since Section 12(a) of the Law stipulates that a substitute may be appointed to the position of Chairman of the Council for a period not exceeding three months, then it will be necessary to appoint Dr.  Ben Hai-Segev two substitutes until the end of the cooling-off period.
16. In the opinion regarding Adv. Barashi's candidacy, it was noted that she has participated in past and regular panels on current affairs on various television channels. However, it was clarified that at the present time, Adv. Barashi is a regular guest on radio programs, mainly on the radio station "Galei Israel" - a regional radio station supervised by the Authority.  It was also noted that Adv. Barashi is sometimes a guest on the program broadcast on the i24News TV channel, but this is a channel that is not under the supervision of the Authority.  In this regard, it was determined that her regular participation in programs broadcast on a supervised radio station creates a concern of a conflict of interest vis-à-vis her occupation as a council member.  Accordingly, it was determined that Adv. Barashi must commit not to be a regular guest on programs broadcast on radio stations or on supervised channels.  It was also determined that Adv. Barashi must refrain from dealing with issues that materially affect the radio station "Galei Israel" for a period of six months from her appointment.  Moreover, the opinion noted that in accordance with what was stated in her resume, from 2010 until today, Adv. Barashi has served as a "media consultant and shadow advisor to senior officials in Israeli politics" [emphasis in original ], but that in response to questions from the Legal Bureau to the Ministry of Communications, Adv. Barashi stated that "she has not and has not had any business or political relationship with a minister of government ministers or the prime minister".
17. In the opinion in Dr. Shine's case, it was noted that he was a member of a branch of the Likud Party in Ra'anana, but Dr.  Shine clarified that he was not a member of the branch's management and that he had no role in the party.  It was emphasized that in accordance with Directive 6.5000, membership in a party does not in itself constitute an affiliation within the meaning of the Government Companies Law.
18. At the end of the day, the Minister of Communications submitted to the Committee for the Examination of Appointments a list of 15 candidates for serving as members of the Council, two of whom were from the Arab population. Subsequently, on January 8,2026, the Committee discussed the candidates that were brought before it.  Subsequently, on January 27,2026, the Committee's decision was given and forwarded to the Minister of Communications for review (hereinafter: the Appointment Review Committee's Decision or the Committee's Decision).

Decisions of the Appointments Review Committee

19. As part of the Committee's decision, the Committee for the Examination of Appointments approved twelve appointments and rejected three candidates - a candidate from among the Arab population, Ms. Rima Kamal (hereinafter: Kamal), and two other candidates whose matter is not relevant to the petitions. At the outset, the Committee's decision noted that after reviewing the mailing list of the bodies with which the Minister consulted about the various candidates, and the responses received from those bodies, it emerged that the Minister of Communications held substantive and extensive consultations.  It was also emphasized that the examination of the committee was conducted from a comprehensive and broad perspective, with the aim of ensuring that the council would be composed in accordance with the requirements of section 7(b) of the law, and would include public figures with an appropriate cultural background, experience and knowledge in their fields of expertise, as well as experience and understanding of the social situation in Israel.  Afterwards, the committee's determinations with respect to each and every candidate were reviewed.
20. With regard to Dr. Ben-Hai-Segev's candidacy, the decision of the Appointments Review Committee determined that she meets the conditions of eligibility to serve as a council member and chairperson of the council.  At the same time, it was determined that she must resign from her position as a director of Channel 13 News, and that after her appointment, she will be subject to a three-month ban from dealing with matters relating to the network (Channel 13) and Channel 13 News.  In other words, Dr.  Ben-Hai-Segev was given a limited cooling-off period in duration and scope compared to that determined in the opinion of the legal counsel to the Ministry of Communications.  In addition, in the case of Adv. Barashi, the committee noted that she has many years of experience as a lawyer and is well-known in the fields of current affairs and human rights.  Therefore, the committee found that Adv. Barashi meets the conditions of eligibility to serve as a council member, and no restriction has been set in her case.  In the case of Dr.  Shine, the committee noted that he holds a doctorate in law and holds a certificate of rabbinical ordination.  The Appointments Review Committee noted that it had approved his candidacy in light of his education and knowledge in the field of the rabbinate, as well as his ability to represent a wide range of streams and opinions in the Israeli public.
21. In its summary of its decision, the Committee for the Examination of Appointments noted that in light of its conclusion not to approve three candidates, the composition of the Council should be supplemented by other candidates. In this regard, it was emphasized that the Committee expects the presentation of candidates representing communities with special needs as well as other representative populations.  The Committee clarified that "there is a serious and essential need for an appointment that will reflect the representation of these populations in order to improve the Council's activities, and to give appropriate expression to these populations in all areas of the Council's activity and powers." The committee's decision also determined that the council is obligated to establish itself as a single body of 15 members, and that the appointment of the remaining candidates should be carried out within a period not exceeding three months.  Finally, the committee determined that if this period passes and the appointments are not made, it will have to conduct an up-to-date examination of all the candidacies.
22. The day after the committee's decision, on January 28,2026, the Minister of Communications contacted the advisory bodies in another round of consultations and asked for their comments regarding additional candidates, including Ms. Isfahan Bahloul, a candidate from among the Arab population serving as an "outgoing" council member (hereinafter: Bahloul). However, Ms. Bahloul's candidacy was revoked, due to concerns of a conflict of interest, stemming from the fact that her father broadcasts a radio program on a station supervised by the council.
23. Between me and me, during the month of February 2026, the Office of the Attorney General (hereinafter also: the Attorney General) received inquiries in which a claim was raised against the committee's decision - inquiries on behalf of the petitioner in the High Court of Justice case 63904-03-26, the Journalists Association (NPO), and on behalf of the petitioner in the High Court of Justice case 64783-03-26, the Israel News Company Ltd., It is the news company of Keshet (Channel 12) (hereinafter: the Journalists' Association and News 12, respectively). Subsequently, the committee was asked by the Counseling and Legislation Department of the Ministry of Justice to address the claims that were raised.
24. At the same time, the Committee for the Examination of Appointments discussed four additional candidates proposed by the Minister, of whom the Committee approved three and disqualified one in the framework of an additional decision of March 8,2026 (hereinafter: the Committee's decision of March 8,2026). At the conclusion of this decision, the Committee emphasized that one additional appointment must be completed, and that it is expected that candidates whose appointment will fulfill the purpose of the provisions of Section 18A2 of the Government Companies Law regarding the duty of proper representation will be presented.  The Committee reiterated that it is appropriate that the appointment of all candidates be carried out within a period not exceeding three months, and that as this period passes, a re-examination of the candidacies will be required.
25. Subsequently, another candidate was transferred for examination by the committee, and as part of its decision of March 16,2026, the committee approved her candidacy (hereinafter: the committee's decision of March 16,2026). In the conclusion of the decision, the committee for examining appointments reiterated that the council is obligated to establish as a single body of 15 members, and that with the approval of the 16 candidates that have been submitted, the minister will be able to establish a council characterized by a balanced and diverse composition.
26. On the same day, the Minister of Communications contacted the Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Communications and informed her of his intention to bring to the government a proposal for the appointment of the Council. Accordingly, the Minister requested that an opinion and a government decision be prepared as soon as possible for the Council's approval at the Cabinet meeting that was scheduled to take place the following week.  In the meantime, it should be noted that despite the requests of the legal counsel to the Government, no response was received from the Committee regarding the petitioners' inquiries mentioned in the paragraph ‏23

Government Decisions

27. On March 18,2026, the Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Communications distributed a draft opinion. At the same time, on the same day, a draft proposal for decision-makers regarding the appointment of the Council of the Second Authority was circulated for the Ministry of Justice's consideration.  On the same day, the Attorney General and the Committee for the Examination of Appointments were sent a letter on behalf of the Petitioner in the High Court of Justice case 75473-03-26, the Press and Media Council in Israel (NPO) (hereinafter: the Press Council).
28. Four days later, on Sunday, March 22,2026, the Minister of Communications announced that he intends to bring the appointment of the council to a discussion at the cabinet meeting to be held on March 24,2026. On the same day, the agenda of the cabinet meeting was published, which included the proposal of the decision-makers regarding the appointment of the "incoming" council.
29. Shortly before the Cabinet meeting, on March 24,2026, the Deputy Attorney General (Public-Administrative Law) sent a letter to the Minister and the Cabinet Secretary, requesting that the proposed resolution not be brought to the Cabinet meeting for discussion (hereinafter: the Deputy Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General's letter, respectively). In this context, the Deputy Attorney General noted that with regard to some of the candidates whose names are listed in the draft resolution, inquiries were received from various parties, in which it was claimed that these were appointments with various flaws.  It was emphasized that these requests were forwarded to the Committee for the Examination of Appointments, but it has not yet responded.  Subsequently, the Deputy Advisor emphasized the following:

"At the present point in time, the legal examination required for the purpose of bringing the proposal to the government for approval has not yet been completed, as is also required by the government's work regulations.  This, as stated, is due to the need to receive factual references and to complete the examination of various legal issues that arise in relation to some of the candidates for appointment in the framework of the decision" ( paragraph 4 of the Deputy Advisor's letter).