Israel’s attorney general issued a sharp rebuke to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday, warning him that he had broken the law by announcing that he would become more personally involved in his government’s efforts to overhaul the judiciary.
The attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, said Mr. Netanyahu’s announcement on Thursday night had breached a Supreme Court ruling from earlier in the year that said the prime minister must avoid conflicts of interest between his professional role and private interests.
Mr. Netanyahu is currently on trial for corruption in the same judicial system that his government is trying to overhaul.
“Your statement last night,” Ms. Baharav-Miara wrote in a letter to Mr. Netanyahu on Friday, was “illegal and tainted by a conflict of interest.”
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The development added a dramatic new complexity to Israel’s internal turmoil, which was set off in January when Mr. Netanyahu’s government announced plans to increase government control over who gets to be a judge and reduce the judiciary’s ability to strike down laws passed by Parliament.
A divisive proposal. A package of proposed legislation for a far-reaching overhaul of the judicial system in Israel has set off mass protests by those who say it will destroy the country’s democratic foundations. Here is what to know:
What changes are being proposed? Israel’s right-wing government wants to change the makeup of a committee that selects judges to give representatives and appointees of the government a majority. The legislation would also restrict the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down laws passed by Parliament and weaken the authority of the attorney general, who is independent of the government.
What do opponents of the plan say? The front opposing the legislation, which includes Israelis largely from the center and left, argues that the overhaul would deal a mortal blow to the independence of the judiciary, which they view as the only check on government power. They say that the legislation would change the Israeli system from a liberal democracy with protections for minorities to a tyranny of majority rule.
Where does Benjamin Netanyahu stand? In the past, Netanyahu, Israel’s current prime minister, was a staunch defender of the independence of the courts. His recent appointment of Yariv Levin, a leader of the judicial overhaul, to the role of justice minister signaled a turnaround, even though Netanyahu publicly promised that any changes would be measured and handled responsibly.
Is there room for compromise? The politicians driving the plan said they were prepared to talk and a group of academics and lawmakers, in the meantime, met behind the scenes for weeks to find a compromise. On March 15, the government rejected a compromise by Issac Herzog, the president of Israel, that was dismissed by Netanyahu soon after it was published.
In his address Thursday, he promised to go ahead next week with plans to give the government greater control over appointments to the Supreme Court — squashing rumors that he was about to back down. He spoke shortly after the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, met with Mr. Netanyahu to warn him about the effect the turmoil has had on the military.
His speech capped a day in which thousands of protesters demonstrated across Israel against the plan.
Image
Demonstrators and police officers clashed at a protest in Tel Aviv on Thursday. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis have joined weekly demonstrations against the judicial overhaul.Credit...Oded Balilty/Associated Press
The attorney general’s office gave no indication Friday that she would begin legal proceedings herself. But at least one organization said Friday it planned to petition the Supreme Court to adjudicate, possibly opening yet another front between the government and the judiciary.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
One of the groups leading the anti-government protests, the Movement for the Quality of Government, said it would file a motion for contempt of court and “demand that the prime minister be subject to the sanctions set forth in the law, including heavy fines and imprisonment.”
Supporters of the judicial overhaul say it is necessary to give elected lawmakers primacy over unelected judges. But critics say it will remove one of the few checks on government overreach, potentially paving the way for authoritarian rule.
The standoff has led to one of the gravest domestic crises in Israeli history.
Hundreds of thousands of protesters have been demonstrating against the plans every week since the start of the year. Business leaders have begun to divest from Israel amid fears about looming threats to the rule of law. Thousands of military reservists have either warned that they would refuse volunteer service if the overhaul passes, or have already done so. And leading public figures, including the president, Isaac Herzog, have warned that the crisis might lead to civil war.
The attorney general’s intervention on Friday amplified tensions because it raised the possibility that Mr. Netanyahu — already on trial for bribery and fraud — could be prosecuted for yet another possible breach of the law.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
There was no immediate official response from the office of Mr. Netanyahu, who flew to London early Friday to meet with the British prime minister, Rishi Sunak.
But Mr. Netanyahu’s allies in Likud, his right-wing party, said that the prime minister had acted legally and accused the attorney general, who was appointed by the previous government, of her own conflict of interest.
“As someone who was appointed and managed by Gideon Saar and his friends, who are influenced by hatred of Netanyahu, you are tainted by a serious conflict of interest when it comes to dealing with Prime Minister Netanyahu,” said Shlomo Karhi, the communications minister, referring to the justice minister in the previous government. “The legal situation is clear: You must avoid any involvement with Netanyahu.”
www.nytimes.com
The attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, said Mr. Netanyahu’s announcement on Thursday night had breached a Supreme Court ruling from earlier in the year that said the prime minister must avoid conflicts of interest between his professional role and private interests.
Mr. Netanyahu is currently on trial for corruption in the same judicial system that his government is trying to overhaul.
“Your statement last night,” Ms. Baharav-Miara wrote in a letter to Mr. Netanyahu on Friday, was “illegal and tainted by a conflict of interest.”
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
The development added a dramatic new complexity to Israel’s internal turmoil, which was set off in January when Mr. Netanyahu’s government announced plans to increase government control over who gets to be a judge and reduce the judiciary’s ability to strike down laws passed by Parliament.
What to Know About Israel’s Judiciary Overhaul
Card 1 of 5A divisive proposal. A package of proposed legislation for a far-reaching overhaul of the judicial system in Israel has set off mass protests by those who say it will destroy the country’s democratic foundations. Here is what to know:
What changes are being proposed? Israel’s right-wing government wants to change the makeup of a committee that selects judges to give representatives and appointees of the government a majority. The legislation would also restrict the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down laws passed by Parliament and weaken the authority of the attorney general, who is independent of the government.
What do opponents of the plan say? The front opposing the legislation, which includes Israelis largely from the center and left, argues that the overhaul would deal a mortal blow to the independence of the judiciary, which they view as the only check on government power. They say that the legislation would change the Israeli system from a liberal democracy with protections for minorities to a tyranny of majority rule.
Where does Benjamin Netanyahu stand? In the past, Netanyahu, Israel’s current prime minister, was a staunch defender of the independence of the courts. His recent appointment of Yariv Levin, a leader of the judicial overhaul, to the role of justice minister signaled a turnaround, even though Netanyahu publicly promised that any changes would be measured and handled responsibly.
Is there room for compromise? The politicians driving the plan said they were prepared to talk and a group of academics and lawmakers, in the meantime, met behind the scenes for weeks to find a compromise. On March 15, the government rejected a compromise by Issac Herzog, the president of Israel, that was dismissed by Netanyahu soon after it was published.
In his address Thursday, he promised to go ahead next week with plans to give the government greater control over appointments to the Supreme Court — squashing rumors that he was about to back down. He spoke shortly after the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, met with Mr. Netanyahu to warn him about the effect the turmoil has had on the military.
His speech capped a day in which thousands of protesters demonstrated across Israel against the plan.
Image
Demonstrators and police officers clashed at a protest in Tel Aviv on Thursday. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis have joined weekly demonstrations against the judicial overhaul.Credit...Oded Balilty/Associated Press
The attorney general’s office gave no indication Friday that she would begin legal proceedings herself. But at least one organization said Friday it planned to petition the Supreme Court to adjudicate, possibly opening yet another front between the government and the judiciary.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
One of the groups leading the anti-government protests, the Movement for the Quality of Government, said it would file a motion for contempt of court and “demand that the prime minister be subject to the sanctions set forth in the law, including heavy fines and imprisonment.”
Supporters of the judicial overhaul say it is necessary to give elected lawmakers primacy over unelected judges. But critics say it will remove one of the few checks on government overreach, potentially paving the way for authoritarian rule.
The standoff has led to one of the gravest domestic crises in Israeli history.
Hundreds of thousands of protesters have been demonstrating against the plans every week since the start of the year. Business leaders have begun to divest from Israel amid fears about looming threats to the rule of law. Thousands of military reservists have either warned that they would refuse volunteer service if the overhaul passes, or have already done so. And leading public figures, including the president, Isaac Herzog, have warned that the crisis might lead to civil war.
The attorney general’s intervention on Friday amplified tensions because it raised the possibility that Mr. Netanyahu — already on trial for bribery and fraud — could be prosecuted for yet another possible breach of the law.
Story continues below advertisement
Continue reading the main story
There was no immediate official response from the office of Mr. Netanyahu, who flew to London early Friday to meet with the British prime minister, Rishi Sunak.
But Mr. Netanyahu’s allies in Likud, his right-wing party, said that the prime minister had acted legally and accused the attorney general, who was appointed by the previous government, of her own conflict of interest.
“As someone who was appointed and managed by Gideon Saar and his friends, who are influenced by hatred of Netanyahu, you are tainted by a serious conflict of interest when it comes to dealing with Prime Minister Netanyahu,” said Shlomo Karhi, the communications minister, referring to the justice minister in the previous government. “The legal situation is clear: You must avoid any involvement with Netanyahu.”
Israel’s Attorney General Says Netanyahu Broke Law With Judicial Intervention Pledge
Gali Baharav-Miara said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu created a conflict of interest by saying he would become more involved in pushing for a judicial overhaul while on trial for corruption.
