Proposed Israeli Law Could Derail Bennett’s Political Comeback
A bill introduced this week in the Israeli Knesset seeks to bar party leaders with unpaid party debts from launching new political factions without first repaying what they owe. Framed as a financial accountability measure, the legislation has triggered controversy over its potential retroactive application and the perception that it is aimed squarely at former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett.
“The law I submitted deals with a situation in which a party leader leaves behind debts—whether to suppliers, workers or the state—and then returns to seek reelection,” MK Avichay Buaron of the Likud party, who wrote the bill, told The Media Line. “There is no problem with someone returning to politics, but not at the public’s expense.”
Buaron explained that under the proposal, any funds received by the new party would first be used to repay the debts of the defunct one. “It doesn’t matter if the debt is 5, 10, or 20 million shekels [$1 million to $6 million]—as in Bennett’s case,” he said. “Before starting a new political campaign, the first money coming in should go to settle those old debts.”
Although Buaron insists the legislation is general in nature and applies to any party leader deemed responsible for financial mismanagement by the state comptroller, some have accused the bill of seeking to stifle particular politicians. Those accusations are bolstered by Buaron’s references to specific figures during the bill’s presentation—among them Bennett, Yair Lapid, and Ehud Barak.
This is not about banning anyone from running. It’s about basic decency. You can’t come back asking for public trust when you haven’t fulfilled your previous obligations. Israeli politics needs to respect itself.
“This is not about banning anyone from running,” Buaron said. “It’s about basic decency. You can’t come back asking for public trust when you haven’t fulfilled your previous obligations. Israeli politics needs to respect itself.”
According to the bill, if a party ceases to exist and the state comptroller determines that it accrued debt due to improper conduct, its former leader will be required to repay those debts—via the funding of any new party they form or lead—if the return occurs within seven years. Buaron explained the choice of a seven-year window by referencing Israeli civil law, which sets the statute of limitations for tort claims at the same duration. “It’s about bringing legal symmetry and normalcy into party law,” he said.
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
But critics argue the proposal lacks neutrality. Assaf Shapira, head of the political reform program at the Israel Democracy Institute, called the initiative both problematic and dangerous. “It’s a personal law, and everyone understands it is primarily directed at one individual,” he told The Media Line.
Shapira also warned that the bill is retroactive in nature, despite Buaron’s claims to the contrary. He noted that no such law was on the books when Bennet left his previous parties. “Now it’s being used to punish actions taken before it existed. That’s a classic case of retroactivity,” he said.
The implications go beyond legal theory. Shapira pointed out that if enacted, the bill could effectively disable Bennett from financing a new campaign. “Let’s say his new party qualifies for an advance of 10 or 12 million shekels [around $3 million]. That entire sum would have to go toward old debts before it can be used to run a campaign. That cripples the party’s ability to compete, plain and simple,” he said.
In Shapira’s view, the problem is not the desire to address unpaid political debts, but the narrowness and selectivity of the approach. “There is indeed a problem with parties accumulating debt and disappearing, leaving creditors behind,” he said. But he noted that Likud currently owes over 42 million shekels, or about $12 million, to the state, far more than Bennett’s Yamina party ever owed.
Why target the small, defunct parties and ignore the elephant in the room?
“Why target the small, defunct parties and ignore the elephant in the room?” he asked.
Asked whether he sees the bill as part of a broader pattern of legislative control over the political field, Shapira was cautious but firm. “If this bill advances, it joins a trend of proposals that undermine electoral fairness,” he said, referring to recent initiatives to amend Israel’s Basic Laws in ways that would ease disqualification of Arab parties. “I wouldn’t say it’s on the same level, but yes, it clearly undermines the integrity of the system if you tailor laws to limit specific challengers.”
Buaron rejected the idea that the bill was drafted under pressure from any political body or coalition leadership. “No one asked me to write it,” he said. “I worked on it with my team and senior legal advisers from the Knesset committees. We studied the issue and drafted it ourselves.”
You can still form a new party. But before you ask for more trust and more public money, you need to pay what you owe.
He also insisted the law does not infringe on the right to run for office. “You can still form a new party,” he said. “But before you ask for more trust and more public money, you need to pay what you owe.”
Shapira doesn’t disagree with the ethical principle—but he finds the legislative execution deeply flawed. “What Bennett did was not admirable, and I agree in spirit that politicians should not walk away from their obligations,” he said. “But the way to address this is through a comprehensive reform of party financing—not by singling out individuals with problematic legal tools.”
If the bill moves forward, it is likely to undergo changes in committee, and may be softened to apply only to future conduct. But for now, it opens a debate not only about financial responsibility in politics, but about the very rules of political competition in Israel’s fragile multiparty democracy.
