Justice minister: A-G ‘essential,’ but government must have ‘final say’

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked said Wednesday that the role of attorney general is “essential” to Israel’s democracy, but that the government must retain the “final say” on all legal decisions.

The minister, who has sought to curb the authority of both the attorney general and the High Court of Justice, said the former compromises Israel’s governance and must strictly be a legal adviser rather than a decision-maker.

While the attorney general is “essential,” and an important “cornerstone,” said Shaked,”in many cases in the past few years we have been witness to a situation where the judgment of the attorney has replaced the judgment of the minister.”

“Government ministers should continue to seriously consider all legal guidance they receive, but the right to the final say must remain the government’s,” the justice minister added.

Shaked said the “veto” imposed by the attorney general undermines the government’s ability to make decisions. The situation in Israel is “exceptional” as compared to the rest of the world, she added.

State Attorney Shai Nitzan, speaking at the same event in Jerusalem hosted by the Kohelet Policy Forum think tank, retorted that the attorney general and state prosecutor are tasked with ensuring that government decisions are legal, and cannot be expected to defend positions that are not lawful before Israel’s courts.

“Ministers are also subject to the law. The government is also subject to the law,” said Nitzan. “It cannot be that that we defend a policy that is illegal.”

So long as the government decisions — be it administrative detention or house demolitions — have a legal precedent, the officials do have an obligation to defend the state’s position regardless of their personal qualms, added Nitzan.

In late September, Shaked dismissed objections by Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to proposed legislation to enforce mandatory minimum sentences for stone throwers, remarking that the government legal adviser’s opinion was not binding.

“The attorney general — it’s his right and his duty is to give his opinion,” she told Army Radio. “At the end of the day, if something is not unconstitutional, [it is] the cabinet [that] decides whether to legislate the law or not. ”

The security cabinet proceeded to advance tougher measures against rock throwers, despite Weinstein’s disapproval.

The attorney general also recently made headlines after he said a probe into Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan’s controversial pick for police commissioner — former IDF commander Gal Hirsch — would take months to complete, prompting the Likud minister to drop the nomination.

Weinstein also recently ordered an investigation into the prime minister’s spending expenses and into assault charges against Likud MK Oren Hazan, and thwarted Culture Minister Miri Regev’s plans to cut off funding to cultural institutions she deemed “unpatriotic,” claiming it “limited artistic freedom of expression.” He also green-lighted soccer matches on Shabbat, which had been subject to a legal ban.

Former justice minister Tzipi Livni, also peaking at WEdnesday’s event, dismissed the various objections to the attorney general as a government “excuse” to explain its inaction on various issues.

The debate is “problematic,” and “good for the government, and bad for democracy,” said Livni.

The former justice minister also denied the attorney general held any sort of official veto power, and said that he simply made recommendations which were taken into account in ministerial votes.

“Those that want to govern, will govern. And those that want to find excuses, will find them,” she charged.