Israeli Attorney General Opposes Police Investigations Department Appointments During Election Period
The Israeli Attorney General has formally opposed advancing appointments to senior positions in the Police Investigations Department (Mahash) during the current election period. On Thursday, she requested the Supreme Court to halt the promotion of candidates for the roles of Department Director and the new supervisor overseeing police investigations until after the October 27 Knesset elections. The Attorney General's submission argues that these appointments, intended to implement structural changes in Mahash, are vulnerable to significant political influence and could constrain the incoming government.
This legal stance follows a Supreme Court directive asking the government to clarify whether it intends to proceed with these appointments before the 26th Knesset elections. The Attorney General highlighted that the appointment committee has not yet been fully formed, but the Justice Minister exerts considerable influence over three of its five members, including the committee chair, who is the Ministry of Justice Director General and considered a political appointee.
The Attorney General warned that advancing the appointments now could create a chilling effect among police officers, investigators, and prosecutors, undermining Mahash's current functioning. She emphasized that the two positions are among the most sensitive in law enforcement and that the ongoing department is currently led by an acting head with extensive experience. She also noted that the lengthy terms of office (six years for the director and three for the supervisor) could lock in political influence beyond the election.
The Attorney General concluded that there is no urgency justifying completing these appointments before the elections and urged the Supreme Court to prevent further progress until after the new government is formed. She expressed concern that proceeding now would jeopardize Mahash's independence and deter key legal personnel and journalists involved in oversight.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.