Israel’s President Herzog to name candidate to form government on Sunday

Naming a candidate means President Isaac Herzog formally selects the lawmaker he believes has the best chance of assembling a governing coalition. This follows consultations with parties elected to the 120-seat Knesset. It is a constitutional step, not an automatic appointment as prime minister.

The chosen candidate then receives a mandate and has 28 days to negotiate with political parties. Herzog may grant a further 14 days. The candidate must secure enough support inside the Knesset to create a functioning government.

The decision matters because the October 27 election produced no clear majority. Gadi Eisenkot received 67 recommendations, compared with 46 for Benjamin Netanyahu, but Herzog noted that blocs and parties could veto one another. Netanyahu remains caretaker prime minister until a coalition forms or another election is required.

Gadi Eisenkot received endorsements from 67 lawmakers during Herzog’s consultations. Benjamin Netanyahu received 46. Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, has 120 seats. Eisenkot therefore had the larger recommendation total by a clear margin.

Those figures show which candidate currently has broader support among elected lawmakers. Two parties representing Israel’s Palestinian minority helped produce Eisenkot’s total of 67. His alliance itself won 48 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud won 27 and his wider religious-nationalist coalition won 53.

The numbers still do not guarantee a government. Eisenkot and Netanyahu have both ruled out governing with Arab-led parties, even though those parties recommended Eisenkot. Other parties can also impose conditions or refuse cooperation. Herzog therefore said mutual vetoes within and between blocs made the final outcome difficult to predict.

A recommendation tells Herzog which candidate lawmakers prefer, but it does not automatically create a governing majority. A government needs parties willing to cooperate, agree on policies, and support its formation inside the Knesset. Those relationships can change during negotiations.

The article gives a clear example. Two Arab-led parties recommended Eisenkot, helping him reach 67 endorsements. Yet Eisenkot has ruled out forming a government with those parties. His alliance also spans centre-left to right, creating possible disagreements within his own bloc. Herzog referred to mutual vetoes between and within the blocs.

Eisenkot therefore must find partners beyond the recommendation count. United Torah Judaism declined to recommend anyone but, according to an Eisenkot ally, might support a suitable offer. The candidate must turn endorsements and negotiations into an actual coalition within the 28-day mandate.

The Knesset is Israel’s parliament, and it has 120 seats. Political parties elected to it determine which alliances are possible after an election. President Herzog consults those parties before choosing a candidate to form the government.

A candidate needs a coalition because no single bloc won enough seats to govern alone in the October 27 election. Likud was the largest individual party with 27 seats. Netanyahu’s wider religious-nationalist coalition had 53, while Eisenkot’s four-party alliance won 48. Two Arab parties added 19 seats.

These figures show why negotiations inside the Knesset matter. Parties must agree to support a government, even if they do not formally join it. A candidate who cannot secure workable parliamentary backing cannot govern successfully. The mandate therefore focuses on turning separate election results into a coalition with enough support.

Once Herzog nominates a candidate, that person receives a fixed period to negotiate a coalition. The candidate has 28 days to try to form a government. Herzog can allow a further 14 days, giving negotiations more time but not guaranteeing success.

The candidate must bring parties together around enough parliamentary support. This may involve negotiating with parties that endorsed someone else, declined to recommend anyone, or want specific concessions. The article says United Torah Judaism’s support could become available if it received an acceptable offer.

If the candidate cannot form a coalition, Netanyahu stays prime minister of a caretaker government. The article says another election must be held if no candidate succeeds. This keeps the existing government operating temporarily while political parties try to resolve the deadlock or return to voters.

Parties influence the mandate through Herzog’s consultations. Their recommendations help show which candidate appears to have the strongest parliamentary backing. A party does not have to promise cabinet participation to affect that calculation.

The Arab-led parties demonstrate this mechanism. They recommended Eisenkot and helped raise his total to 67, even though Eisenkot had ruled out forming a government with them. United Torah Judaism took a different route: it declined to recommend any candidate, leaving its potential support open for later negotiations.

That flexibility can change the balance after the mandate is awarded. Yariv Oppenheimer said United Torah Judaism had signalled that its support was available for the right price. Eisenkot might therefore need to negotiate with parties that remain outside his government. Their recommendations and conditions can influence both Herzog’s choice and the coalition’s eventual shape.

A peaceful transfer of power is a basic safeguard in a parliamentary democracy. It means political authority can move from one government to another through accepted legal and electoral procedures. That process helps citizens trust both elections and the institutions that manage them.

The article describes a direct challenge. Netanyahu seized on an investigation into possible vote tampering and accused Arab-led parties of stealing the vote. Critics said his allies were trying to undermine the results. Israel’s Central Election Committee said the election’s integrity had not been compromised.

Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg told Herzog that elected officials should protect public trust, not shake it. He called the situation a real danger and linked democracy to a peaceful transfer of power. The next government’s legitimacy will depend on following the mandate process and respecting the certified election outcome.