What's happened
Israel's Supreme Court ruled that the government's attempt to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara was invalid due to procedural flaws and established legal mechanisms. The ruling affirms her lawful position amid ongoing judicial reforms and political tensions.
What's behind the headline?
The court's ruling underscores the importance of procedural integrity in judicial appointments and dismissals, reaffirming the independence of the attorney general's office. The decision exposes the government's attempt to politicize the judiciary, which risks undermining the rule of law. The swift rejection of the government's new dismissal process reveals a broader resistance to judicial reforms perceived as weakening judicial independence. This ruling will likely intensify tensions between the judiciary and the government, especially as Netanyahu's coalition continues to push reforms. The court's stance signals that any future attempts to alter the legal framework for key judicial roles must adhere strictly to established legal procedures, or face nullification. The potential for a constitutional crisis remains, as some ministers have publicly defied the court's rulings, risking further erosion of judicial authority and democratic norms.
What the papers say
The New Arab and Reuters both report that the Supreme Court invalidated the government's attempt to dismiss Baharav-Miara, citing procedural flaws and the importance of established legal mechanisms. The New Arab emphasizes the political context, including Netanyahu's judicial overhaul and protests, while Reuters highlights the legal reasoning and potential constitutional crisis. The Times of Israel provides detailed insights into the court's critique of the government's rushed decision-making process and the implications for judicial independence, supporting the view that any change to the dismissal process must follow legal standards. All sources agree that the ruling reinforces the rule of law and limits executive overreach, but differ slightly in tone—The New Arab focusing on political tensions, Reuters on procedural legality, and The Times of Israel on constitutional implications.
How we got here
In March, Israel's cabinet attempted to dismiss Baharav-Miara through a no-confidence vote, citing disagreements. The government also sought to overhaul the process for firing an attorney general, aiming to shift decision-making from professional committees to political bodies. The Supreme Court's intervention highlights the controversy over judicial independence and government overreach, especially amid Netanyahu's judicial reform plans and protests over perceived threats to democratic checks and balances.
Go deeper
More on these topics
-
Gali Baharav-Miara is an Israeli lawyer who serves as the current Attorney General of Israel. Prior to that, she served as the Tel Aviv District Attorney for Civil Affairs, and as a consultant to the law firm Tadmor, Levy, & Co.
-
Benjamin Netanyahu is an Israeli politician serving as Prime Minister of Israel since 2009, and previously from 1996 to 1999. Netanyahu is also the Chairman of the Likud – National Liberal Movement.