Three Years After October 7, Israel Still Has No National Commission of Inquiry. Can a New Political Proposal Break the Deadlock?

With the country approaching another election, the investigation into its worst security failure remains caught between competing political and legal frameworks.

Three years after the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks, Israel has yet to establish a comprehensive national commission of inquiry under its existing Commissions of Inquiry Law.

The delay has become a controversy in its own right.

Although the Israel Defense Forces and domestic security agencies have conducted internal investigations, the country has not completed an independent examination encompassing the full chain of military, intelligence and political decision-making.

The government has resisted establishing a conventional state commission, while supporting an alternative appointment mechanism. Its critics argue that political involvement in selecting investigators could compromise the inquiry's independence.

In September 2026, Israel's High Court postponed further consideration of petitions concerning a state commission until after the election, setting January 15, 2027, as the deadline for a government update.

The result is a national investigation that remains unresolved more than three years after the disaster.

A Third Approach Enters the Debate

Against this background, former senior IDF officer Ofer Winter and his Amcha Yisrael party have presented a separate proposal.

Rather than allowing the government to appoint an investigative body or using the established Supreme Court-led appointment mechanism, the party proposes that the next Knesset elect two retired judges through a secret ballot.

Under the plan, groups of lawmakers would nominate judicial candidates. The highest-ranking candidate would chair the commission, while the runner-up would become deputy chair.

The proposal is intended to combine judicial leadership with parliamentary participation.

Winter's party argues that a mechanism involving all lawmakers could produce broader legitimacy than a commission associated with either the government or a single judicial appointing authority.

But whether parliamentary selection would reduce political conflict remains uncertain.

Secret voting could allow lawmakers to act independently of party leadership. It could also produce a result shaped by existing parliamentary majorities.

Independence Cannot Be Assumed

The proposed commission would include nine members, combining judges, professional experts and representatives of affected communities and families.

Its intended mandate would cover not only the events of October 7 but also decisions made in preceding years.

The framework would require new legal arrangements defining the commission's authority, access to classified information and safeguards against political interference.

Those details are critical.

An investigative commission is credible not simply because its members are judges or because parliament participates in selecting them.

Its credibility depends on whether investigators can examine every relevant official and institution, compel testimony, review evidence and reach conclusions without external direction.

The traditional state commission model already provides substantial investigative powers and an established legal framework. Supporters of that model question the need to replace its appointment mechanism.

Winter's proposal therefore enters a debate about more than institutional design.

Israel must decide whether it can create a process acceptable to a sufficiently broad public while preserving the independence required to establish uncomfortable facts.

A Question Beyond the Election

The coming election may change which political parties control the government, but it will not remove the need for a credible investigation.

Any commission will have to determine why warnings failed, how military readiness deteriorated and which decisions contributed to the vulnerability of southern communities.

It will also need to distinguish between professional errors, failures of judgment and questions of political responsibility.

Amcha Yisrael's proposal offers one possible institutional route.

The larger challenge remains whether Israel's next government and parliament can agree on a framework that investigates the disaster without predetermining its conclusions.

Until that happens, the country remains without the comprehensive national accounting sought by many survivors, bereaved families and citizens.