Four Laws, One Legal Bomb: Pitfalls Awaiting New Knesset
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
The outgoing Israeli government passed four controversial laws concerning judicial appointments, the Police Internal Investigations Department, communications regulation, and the Attorney General's authority. These laws face significant legal challenges and petitions to the Supreme Court (Bagatz). The new Knesset may also seek to amend or repeal these laws, which critics argue undermine democratic checks and balances and judicial independence. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on these matters, potentially leading to further political and legal battles.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Four controversial laws passed by the outgoing Israeli government are awaiting Supreme Court decisions.
- One law alters the judicial selection committee, giving politicians more power over appointments.
- Another law changes oversight of the Police Internal Investigations Department, raising concerns about government influence.
- A communications law establishing a new broadcast authority faces challenges over press freedom and regulatory control.
- A law weakening the Attorney General's role is also being contested in the Supreme Court.
- The new Knesset may intervene in these legal battles, potentially altering the laws.
The outgoing Israeli government passed several controversial laws, the fate of which now rests with the Supreme Court (Bagatz). The new Knesset may alter these laws, while judges face decisions with broad constitutional implications. One significant law alters the composition of the committee that selects judges. It removes representatives from the Bar Association and replaces them with two professional appointees, chosen one each by the coalition and opposition. This law also strips judges of their veto power over Supreme Court appointments, requiring agreement from coalition, opposition, and judicial representatives for all appointments, except for Supreme Court positions. This effectively grants politicians primacy on the committee. The Supreme Court is expected to avoid ruling on this Basic Law, hoping the new Knesset will address it.
Another law concerns the Police Internal Investigations Department (Mahash). It establishes a "commissioner" appointed by the Justice Minister to decide whether to transfer cases to Mahash. Critics, including the Attorney General's office, fear this commissioner could halt investigations inconvenient to the government and prioritize those it favors, potentially derailing sensitive inquiries. Mahash would also be administratively subordinate to the Justice Minister and his budget. Petitions against this law are pending before the Supreme Court.
A third law, the Communications (Broadcasting) Law, aims to establish an independent statutory body, the Broadcast Authority, to consolidate existing regulatory bodies. This law, which passed its second and third readings in July, has faced petitions to the Supreme Court. The Movement for Quality of Government argued it was designed to "silence free press" before elections, citing a flawed legislative process, its advancement against the Attorney General's advice, and its granting government control over viewing data. Critics also claim it breaks down the structural separation between channel owners and news companies, and allows for control by a few wealthy owners over the market of opinions. The law is unlikely to pass Supreme Court scrutiny due to legislative flaws.
Finally, a law weakening the role of the Attorney General was passed in June. Contrary to early assumptions, it does not split the role but dramatically reduces its influence. While it states the Attorney General's written opinion reflects the law, it allows the government to disregard it. The law places the Attorney General under the supervision of the Justice Minister, requiring reports on activities. Petitions, including one from the Association for Civil Rights, have been filed against this law.
Additionally, the previous Knesset enacted laws that will take effect with the new one, such as one making it difficult to place a prime minister on leave, and changes to the appointment process for the ombudsman for judges.