The Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) said Thursday its investigation into suspected foreign interference in Israel’s election was based on intelligence it collected itself and not information supplied by a political party.
The inquiry should not be a reason to cast suspicion on all Arab voters, it added.
Its statement followed a day of competing allegations over Tuesday’s election, after Central Elections Committee chairman Justice Noam Sohlberg’s instruction to investigate suspected foreign funding and election bribery became public.
Money from abroad, perhaps from Qatar and Turkey, allegedly was used to influence voting in Arab communities, Israeli media outlets reported.
Likud cited the allegations to argue that Arab parties had “stolen” the election, and other parties must not rely on their votes to form a government or replace the Knesset speaker.
Arab party leaders denied wrongdoing, while opposition figures accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of using an unfinished investigation to undermine the legitimacy of the results.
The dispute has extended beyond suspected offenses to the role of Arab parties in the next Knesset. The Shin Bet’s statement did not announce findings establishing foreign interference, and overturning election results would require a separate court proceeding.
The Shin Bet said its investigation remained unfinished, and statements about the substance or nature of the suspicions did not represent its position. The inquiry was focused and limited, it said, adding that it should not be used to discredit a community that voted democratically and lawfully.
The Central Elections Committee also rejected claims of systematic election misconduct. In a response issued with Sohlberg’s approval, acting Director-General Dean Livne said the election had been conducted lawfully, and as far as the committee knew, allegations of systematic harm to election integrity were unfounded.
The inquiry would not delay publication of the final results or prevent President Isaac Herzog from selecting a party leader to begin the coalition-building process, a committee source told The Jerusalem Post.
Asked whether the investigation could lead to another election, the source said it was “far too early for such a question.”
“First, we need to examine whether there was any impact and whether it affects the distribution of Knesset seats at all,” he said.
In a letter dated Wednesday and made public on Thursday, Sohlberg instructed Shin Bet Director David Zini to investigate suspected foreign funding and election bribery.
He described serious suspicions but expressly said he could not assess their merits. He directed Zini to obtain evidence to substantiate or refute them and requested any available findings during the coming week, citing the timetable for election appeals.
The sequence is important: The Shin Bet was in possession of intelligence before Tuesday’s vote; Sohlberg’s written directive and Zini’s meeting with Netanyahu followed on Wednesday; and the inquiry became public on Thursday. The precise date the investigation began, and when Sohlberg first received the information, remain unclear.
Neither Sohlberg’s letter nor the Shin Bet’s subsequent statement identified countries, political parties, or funding routes. Encouraging voter participation is not, by itself, evidence of election bribery.
The Shin Bet said no one outside the agency, apart from Sohlberg, had been exposed to the intelligence before the election ended. On Election Day, Zini publicly described voting as secure and properly supervised.
The Shin Bet said Zini had personally briefed Netanyahu, Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot, and opposition leader Yair Lapid during the preceding 24 hours at Sohlberg’s request and with his approval. Zini initiated the Wednesday evening meeting with Netanyahu.
Meanwhile, four more suspects had been arrested on suspicion of election bribery and were being questioned by Lahav 433 – The National Crime Unit, the Israel Police said Thursday.
Three residents of the South were arrested Tuesday morning, and the case was later transferred to Lahav 433.
The police reported finding cash and Ra’am voting slips during searches. That case remains separate from the election-fraud investigation.
Police dismiss Likud claims
There had been relatively few election-integrity incidents of Election Day, and there was no investigative or intelligence support for Likud’s broader allegations of a stolen election, the police said Thursday.
On Wednesday, Likud said Arab parties had stolen the election through bribery, intimidation, fraud, and other offenses, adding that it was submitting hundreds of testimonies and pieces of evidence to the authorities. The party intends to seek the invalidation of results at polling stations where it suspects irregularities, a Likud lawyer told the Post.
Ra’am chairman Mansour Abbas welcomed Sohlberg’s instruction to investigate, denied that Ra’am had any connection to the affair or other cases, and pledged full cooperation with law enforcement. He accused Netanyahu of inciting against Arab citizens and seeking to delegitimize them.
Qatari Foreign Ministry spokesperson Majed Al Ansari said Qatar had not interfered in the election or funded activities intended to influence its outcome. He accused Israeli politicians and their media contacts of drawing Qatar into domestic political disputes through disinformation.
Turkey also denied interfering in the election, and the presidency’s Center for Combating Disinformation said the allegations were baseless.
The Joint List accused Netanyahu of trying to steal the election and described the allegations as a campaign to undermine the legitimacy of Arab votes. It urged opposition leaders to reject the accusations and act on the election results.
Eisenkot, speaking after meeting Zini and Sohlberg, said it was too early to understand what had happened, “or whether anything happened at all,” and called for an investigation free of political interference.
He accused Netanyahu and Likud of an organized campaign to delegitimize the results and vowed to oppose any departure from the scheduled Knesset swearing-in.
Eisenkot said his teams were preparing bills on conscription and service, a state commission of inquiry into the October 7 massacre, and budget allocations, which he intended to bring to a vote when the Knesset convenes.
The Democrats chairman Yair Golan called for genuine suspicions to be investigated. He accused Netanyahu of trying to delegitimize the electorate’s decision, particularly Arab voters.
The Democrats MK Naama Lazimi compared Likud’s campaign to the January 6 storming of the US Capitol.
Section 86
Knesset Elections Law Section 86 provides a court procedure for challenging election results. No automatic cancellation is triggered by suspicions or unlawful funding. Challenges may concern elections conducted unlawfully, incorrect allocation of votes or seats, or votes obtained illegally. A central requirement is that the alleged irregularity could have affected the results.
Eligible challengers include participating candidate lists and their candidates, MKs, factions of the newly elected Knesset, Central and Regional Election Committee members, and the attorney-general.
An appeal must be filed with the Jerusalem District Court, sitting as an administrative court, within 14 days of publication of the results. A three-judge panel hears the case, and the deadline may be extended in special circumstances.
The court can order a new election nationwide or at a particular polling station, correct the allocation of votes, or determine that one candidate was elected instead of another.
A further appeal on a legal question generally requires permission from the Supreme Court president. If the election is annulled nationwide, those eligible to challenge the results can appeal before five Supreme Court judges or a larger odd-numbered panel.
An election appeal does not suspend the Knesset’s work or invalidate decisions it has already taken.
Amichai Stein and Yonah Jeremy Bob contributed to this report.
