Netanyahu received the majority of endorsements to form the next government, beating out Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid.
By GIL HOFFMAN , JPOST
Rivlin speaks to MKs on April 5 2021.
President Reuven Rivlin gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the mandate to form a coalition on Tuesday morning, after the Likud leader received the most recommendations from his fellow members of Knesset.
In his speech, Rivlin lamented that he could not have imagined when he was elected seven years ago that he would appoint a candidate to form a government five times during his term. He said his main consideration must be who can best form a government that would receive the trust of the Knesset and that no candidate can currently obtain a majority of the Knesset.
“I am under the impression that none of the candidates have a chance to form a coalition,” Rivlin said.
Rivlin said that it is problematic to appoint a candidate with a criminal indictment and on trial, but the Supreme Court has ruled it permissible so he decided to stay out of that debate.
“The president cannot replace the legislators,” Rivlin said. “The decision to prevent a candidate under indictment from forming a government is the Knesset’s decision.”
He said that he decided not to take Netanyahu’s ongoing trial into consideration out of a desire to protect the office of the president which “receives the trust of the public.”
Netanyahu beat out Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid during the Monday meetings at the President’s Residence, making it likely that he would receive the mandate. Another option apparently considered by Rivlin was sending the mandate directly to the Knesset, skipping over specific candidates. This would have given the Knesset, which is sworn in on Tuesday, a few weeks to find a candidate.
Rivlin said that if he could, he would have returned the mandate to the Knesset. But, he said, the law required him to make a decision and to choose one of the members of Knesset who has expressed a willingness to serve in the role.
In Rivlin’s consultations with the 13 factions in the new Knesset, 52 MKs from four factions recommended Netanyahu, while 45 from five factions recommended Lapid. Yamina recommended its leader, Naftali Bennett; Gideon Sa’ar’s New Hope and the two Arab factions didn’t recommend anyone.
The decision by Yamina and New Hope not to recommend Lapid was aimed at obtaining the mandate from Rivlin for Bennett if Netanyahu fails to form a government during the 28 days he has now been given by Rivlin.
The refusal of the Religious Zionist Party to join a coalition backed by Ra’am (United Arab List) will make it very difficult for Netanyahu to build a coalition.
Meanwhile, Yamina and Yesh Atid have started negotiating a unity government deal in which Bennett would serve as prime minister for the first two years and Lapid the final two and a half years. Yamina’s negotiating team is led by strategists Tal Gan-Zvi and Shalom Shlomo, and Yesh Atid’s by veteran Lapid adviser Hillel Kubrinsky.
The two sides did not reach an agreement on how to share power and divide portfolios in initial talks, which prevented an agreement from being reached in time for Monday’s consultations with Rivlin.
(2 of 2)
The discussion of the indictments against a candidate was, I believe, lengthy and unfortunate. This is just my opinion, but it seems clear to me that Rivlin’s decision to provide this lengthy discussion/explanation emphasizing the fact of the indictments against Netanyahu will act to help prevent him from forming a gov’t, quite the opposite role for the president as I understand his duties. This speech stood in stark contrast to Rivlin’s previous speeches before the Knesset while awarding the mandate. One could argue that he previously provided sagely admonitions against tribalism on one occasion and discussed Netanyahu’s language deriding the Arabs(while ignoring the attacks of the Left against the Haredim) on another. These topics chosen for discussion, while one may agree or disagree with his dialogue, did not in any way lend itself towards the undermining of the formation of a gov’t. In fact, the critique on the threat of tribalism could have, if anything, aided in the formation of a gov’t as he correctly stated the campaign was over and it was a time for reconciliation and the tribalism should be left behind so that the nation, which was deeply divided by the election, could heal and form a gov’t(this is still true today). But today, President Rivlin’s repeated mention of indictments will actually leant support in favor of tribalism and, consequently, forming no gov’t. Indeed, if there was any doubt regarding his intent of this discussion it was soon made clear. Following the explanation for his choice, Rivlin stated:
On a moral level, he and the state would have been better served if he had gone back to the previous speech on the ills of tribalism. It didn’t solve the problem of political divisions the first time, but it did not add to the divisions within the state, as, I believe, this one will. We still need to form a gov’t.
Trick question: What can be more immoral than having a state without a functional gov’t? Perhaps, having a president whose tribalist speech acts to undermine his duties to help the parties coalesce into such a functional gov’t.
/2
(1 of 2)
A more complete video of Rivlin’s comments is located here:
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/299717
Poor President Rivlin. I can only imagine his horror at having to against all odds, award the mandate to form a gov’t to Netanyahu once again. He must have mused to himself with misgivings that, “What, I have to give the mandate to that dog Netanyahu again….Well, I don’t have to do it nicely this time and I’m not going to…” And he didn’t. His discussions within the speech can be divided into two parts:
1. No one is likely to form a gov’t
2. An indictment against a candidate cannot be used to disqualify him.
And then he awarded the mandate to Netanyahu.
\1