Advisor Oz Siminovsky announced today (Tuesday) that he has ended his work with former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s ‘Together’ party after just a few weeks on the job. The resignation comes amid public and media criticism following the exposure of his involvement in Bennett’s campaign and conflict-of-interest allegations raised by attorney Ilan Bombakh on behalf of Likud, as well as by Deputy Minister Cohen.
In a social media post, Siminovsky wrote that he had joined “a few weeks ago to do service for Naftali Bennett’s ‘Together’ party,” emphasizing it was “local and modest service” in a field he has worked in for years. He said he has already completed his role and enjoyed working with the party’s team.
Siminovsky also addressed the difficulty created by combining political activity with an independent media presence. “One of the many things I learned there is that it’s very hard to do a professional political role when you have your own media profile, and especially when you’re promoting a political thought book,” he wrote. He added that the period created “challenging days” for him.
Alongside his resignation announcement, Siminovsky clarified that he intends to continue expressing independent positions on political issues. “I’ve always expressed independent opinions on politics, without giving immunity to any politician. It’s clear I’m continuing on the same path,” he wrote.
As Channel 14 previously exposed, Oz Siminovsky was appointed to a position in Naftali Bennett’s campaign shortly after the controversial appointment of attorney Yifat Siminovsky as legal advisor to the Central Elections Committee. Attorney Ilan Bombakh later sent an urgent letter on behalf of Likud to the Central Elections Committee claiming a conflict of interest and demanding a reexamination of the arrangement.
Bombakh even threatened a petition on the matter: “It stands to reason that Bennett knew that Mr. Oz Siminovsky is your nephew, and that his choice to employ him on the campaign team was not disconnected from knowledge of the family relationship between you, especially in light of your warm recommendation,” Bombakh wrote. “The difficulty here is clear—the rule prohibiting conflict of interest forbids the very presence of a public servant in a situation where there is concern about the existence of a conflict of interest.”