The role of the Attorney General of Israel has been one of the major concerns of the proposed judicial reformBut the debate surrounding the office escalated on Sunday when National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir refused to be represented in court by the attorney general.
The tussle between the coalition and the attorney general Gali Baharav-Miara The controversy lies in whether the office has too much power. The Office of the Attorney General is assigned dual responsibilities in Israel’s current legal system, prosecutor and government legal advisor.
Role of the Attorney General of Israel
The Attorney General performs the law enforcement role through the State Attorney General as head of the State Attorney’s Office. The AG also directs other law enforcement bodies in prosecution activities, including the police. The office is also the only body that can prosecute a prime minister, or strip parliamentary immunity from a Knesset member.
In his second role, as chief legal advisor to the executive branch, the Attorney General’s Office and myriad representatives advise on the preparation of legislation to ensure that it conforms to the law. As an interpreter of the law, the AG’s opinion is binding on the government. As the government’s attorney, the office represents the state in court. The Office makes exceptions to this, but only in rare cases.
Reformists argue that these two areas of work by the Office of the Attorney General should be split into two separate roles – a state prosecutor-general and a chief legal advisor.
Critics have suggested that state prosecutors working closely with government advisers may create a conflict of interest. Some reformists argue that too many responsibilities may lead to neglect of some duties.
The legal adviser’s role has received much ire from reformists, who argue that the attorney general can set policy and limit the designs of duly elected officials.
While reformists argue that the Attorney General’s legally binding position on counter-terrorism and security for railroad government policies such as the will of the office and opposition suggests that in a system that has few checks and balances like Israel’s , AG offers an extra check on extreme policies. They also argue that having legal experts review legislation makes the law more efficient and minimizes future conflicts with the High Court.
AG suspends demotion of Tel Aviv district police commander
Ben-Gvir and the Israel Police Commissioner kobi shabtai On Thursday it decided to remove Tel Aviv district police commander Ami Eshed from his post because of his approach to the protests.
The decision was put on hold by the Attorney General until the legality of the move could be reviewed.
Ben-Gvir argued that Baharav-Miara was interfering in issues of national security that were within his purview, not his.
One of the elements of Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s original declaration of judicial reform was that the government’s legal advisers should hold the same opinion as the government. Currently, government legal advisors can hold a different legal opinion than government officials. If the government is brought to court over a policy or a law, it would mean that they would have legal representation in the court which would be in a different position from them.
An example of this would be the case of the ministerial appointment of Shas chairman Arya Dairy. While the government passed a basic law amendment allowing Derry to serve as a minister despite his prison sentence and upheld his retention of office before the High Court, the Attorney General objected to the reasonableness of Derry’s appointments. advocated.
As part of the reform plan, proponents argue that government officials should not be compelled by lawyers to represent what they see as their interests before the court. He believes that elected officials should be able to seek private representation instead.
While there is no legislation to promote these yet, the institution has been put to the test by Ben-Gvir’s recent refusal to accept representation from the Attorney General.
Ben-Gvir said in a letter that he no longer trusts the Attorney General to represent his interests in court, and that he will hire private lawyers or himself in the future for various appeals against him and his policies. will represent.
Bahrau-Miara rejected this position but noted that in special circumstances it was possible to seek external representation. However, this was decided on a case-by-case basis and no specific appeal was mentioned by Ben-Gvir.
It is unlikely that the High Court will accept a government representative other than a representative of the Attorney General without the permission of the office. If an elected official like Ben-Gvir regularly entered court with another lawyer, and challenged a representative of the AG in a session, that would be unconscionable grounds. If enough officials did this, it could lead to the illegitimacy of court decisions, or even empower the attorney general to grant the above special accommodations more frequently.
What is speculated is that the clash between Ben-Gvir and Baharav-Miara over changing the role of legal advisors and attorney general will prompt the coalition and its supporters to introduce new judicial reform laws.