The Knesset Constitution Committee began on Tuesday to prepare a bill for its first reading that members of the opposition claim were part of the government’s controversial 2023 judicial reforms.
The bill proposed to change the process to elect an ombudsman for Israel’s court system. According to the current law, the appointment is a joint agreement between the justice minister and the supreme court chief justice, and is approved by the Judicial Selection Committee. The new law would shift that power to the Knesset and would require a majority of 70 members of Knesset in a discreet vote. In addition, the new law specifies that the ombudsman would not necessarily need to be a retired judge, which is the current custom but can be anyone proposed by the justice minister or a group of 10 MKs.
The ombudsman is responsible for investigating public complaints against judges.
Arguments against the law
Critics of the law, including the attorney general’s office, have argued that this would lead to the politicization of the sensitive position, as it could lead to a scenario in which the ombudsman becomes associated with one side of the political map and their investigations into judges would then lose public trust.
Constitution Committee chairman MK Simcha Rothman (Religious Zionism Party), however, has argued that the 70 MK majority and discreet vote would ensure enough agreement across the aisle to retain public trust.
The former ombudsman retired in May, and Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Temporary Chief Justice Uzi Fogelman were unable to agree on a candidate, as Fogelman insisted on appointing a retired judge, and Levin refused. Rothman explained during Tuesday’s debate that the bill’s purpose was to avoid the situation of the lack of an ombudsman in the future.
However, representatives of the attorney general’s office, members of the opposition, and even a member of Knesset from the coalition, Likud MK Tally Gotliv, pointed out that if 70 MKs did not agree on a candidate, the law did not include a mechanism to ensure that someone was appointed, and therefore the new law did not solve the problem.
Opposition coordinator MK Merav Ben Ari (Yesh Atid) warned that if Rothman moved forward with the law, the opposition would propose thousands of reservations in order to bog it down. The opposition used similar tactics against the laws connected to the judicial reform in 2023.
Labor MK Gilad Kariv, who chaired the Knesset Constitution Committee, said in a statement, “MK Rothman’s proposal is a ‘test of the waters’ to fully return to the coup de d’état. If Rothman and his colleagues are interested in appointing an ombudsman for the court system, there are many solutions on the table. But what they care about is removing the authority to appoint (the ombudsman) from the Judicial Selection Committee, and shift it to politicians. After electing the ombudsman in the Knesset, we will move to electing the chief justice and High Court justices, and from there to the rest of the judges,” Kariv said.
Rothman countered by pointing out that the fact that the chief justice was involved in appointing the person who would be responsible for hearing complaints against him was problematic. He called out what he said was the opposition’s “bluff,” arguing that the fact that they opposed the bill despite it requiring the agreement of 70 MKs – and not the 61-member simple majority – showed that they were not actually interested in reaching broad agreements.