Will appointments in the Police Internal Investigations Department be halted? High Court demands clarification from Yariv Levin
The High Court of Justice demanded that Justice Minister Yariv Levin clarify whether he intends to advance three appointments under the new Police Internal Investigations Department law during the election period. The appointments pertain to the head of the department, the committee for selecting its director, and the coordinator of investigations. The Attorney General's Office warned against politicization. The petition against the law has not yet been decided, and the court may intervene if the appointments are advanced.
The High Court of Justice demanded that Justice Minister Yariv Levin state whether he intends to advance three appointments under the new Police Internal Investigations Department (Mahash) law during the election period. The appointments pertain to the head of the department, the committee for selecting its director, and the coordinator of investigations. In a brief decision, the justices wrote to Levin: "Submit a notice whether you intend to advance appointments for the head of Mahash, the committee for selecting the director of Mahash, and the coordinator of investigations until the elections, in accordance with the established precedent regarding elections." The Attorney General's Office previously warned that the new law could lead to politicization of Mahash and its appointment procedures. The justices seek to ascertain whether Levin intends to advance the appointments before the elections, even though the government serves as a transitional government. According to court rulings, a government during an election period is required to exercise restraint and moderation in appointments. The High Court's decision may imply that the court will consider intervening if the appointments are advanced during the election period. However, the court has not yet ruled on the petition against the legality of the new Mahash law. It was further stated: "If the minister chooses to advance the appointment despite the pending legal proceedings and despite the election period, the court will have to address this within the framework of the request for an interim order that we filed. Mahash must remain an independent body, and it is forbidden to establish facts on the ground before the court rules on the petition and before the public has its say at the ballot box."