The Knesset’s approval of a law sharply weakening the attorney general marks one of the most consequential changes to Israel’s system of government since the country’s founding.
The legislation, passed Wednesday in its second and third readings, was advanced as part of a political agreement between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition and the ultra-Orthodox parties, which also secured legislation addressing Torah study and military draft enforcement.
Although the coalition abandoned its original plan to split the attorney general’s dual role as government legal adviser and head of the state prosecution, the final law still dramatically reduces the office’s power to restrain ministers and government agencies.
Deputy Attorney General Gil Limon warned during the legislative process that what began as a proposed division of the office had become its effective elimination.
What has changed?
Until now, the attorney general’s interpretation of Israeli law was considered binding on the government unless overturned by a court.
The new law allows the cabinet to reject a legal opinion and declare that it does not reflect the existing law. In practice, the government will be able to adopt its own legal interpretation and proceed despite the attorney general’s objections.
The law, which is due to take effect on Jan. 1, 2027, says this mechanism will not apply directly to criminal powers granted to the attorney general by statute.
Critics argue, however, that the distinction may offer only limited protection. Before opening an investigation or filing charges against a minister or senior official, legal authorities often determine whether the conduct in question was unlawful.
If the government can reject that underlying legal assessment, opponents warn, enforcement involving bribery, improper gifts, abuse of office and other forms of public corruption could be weakened.
Who will speak for the state in court?
The law also changes how Israel is represented before the courts.
Until now, the attorney general generally determined and presented the state’s legal position. Separate representation for ministers or the government was permitted only in exceptional circumstances.
Knesst Constitution Committee Chairman Simcha Rothman
(Photo: Knesset)
Under the new arrangement, the government will determine the state’s position. If the attorney general refuses to defend it, the cabinet may appoint another lawyer.
Once separate counsel is selected, the attorney general will not be allowed to participate in the proceeding without permission from the government or the relevant minister.
The provision does not apply to criminal proceedings.
Coalition lawmakers argue that elected governments are entitled to legal representation that reflects their policies. Opponents say the change could prevent judges from hearing an independent professional assessment of whether government action complies with the law.
Why is the attorney general so powerful in Israel?
Unlike many democracies, Israel has no formal constitution, no second legislative chamber and no federal division of power between national and regional governments.
The attorney general has therefore developed into one of the country’s principal legal checks on executive power.
No single law previously defined the office. Its authority emerged through hundreds of statutory provisions, government decisions and Supreme Court rulings accumulated since Israel’s founding.
Coalition figures say that system gave unelected legal officials excessive power over elected governments.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Constitution Committee Chairman Simcha Rothman, who led the legislation through nearly 70 committee sessions, argue that the new law restores governability and allows ministers to carry out the policies for which they were elected.
What does the law mean for Gali Baharav-Miara?
The legislation may also make it easier for the government to remove Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara.
Within 30 days of the law taking effect, the cabinet must adopt a new decision governing the appointment and dismissal of attorneys general.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin
(Photo: Alex Kolomoisky)
Under the current arrangement, a professional committee headed by a retired Supreme Court justice serves as a barrier against politically motivated removal.
The new law could allow the government to replace that mechanism and reopen dismissal proceedings against Baharav-Miara without the same safeguard.
The government previously attempted to dismiss her while bypassing the committee, but the Supreme Court invalidated the move.
Why do opponents call it a regime change?
Critics say the law allows the government to become the judge of the legality of its own conduct.
They warn that future governments could use public funds to benefit political allies, make senior appointments according to loyalty rather than professional standards, weaken protections for protesters and journalists, or adopt policies that violate equality and due process.
The legislation could also have implications during election periods.
The attorney general traditionally reviews government spending, advises the Central Elections Committee and scrutinizes decisions that could amount to improper political use of public resources.
Once the law takes effect, the cabinet may be able to reject those opinions and proceed under its own interpretation.
Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Opponents fear this could affect campaign-period spending, decisions concerning political parties and the use of state institutions during elections.
Supporters dismiss those warnings as exaggerated and stress that the Supreme Court will retain the power to review government decisions.
What happens now?
Petitions against the law have already been filed with the Supreme Court.
The challengers are expected to argue that the legislation damages the rule of law and Israel’s democratic system by weakening a central restraint on executive authority.
The court could strike down parts of the law, interpret them narrowly or issue an interim order suspending its implementation.
Because the law will take effect only on Jan. 1, 2027, after the Knesset election expected in late October, the justices may not immediately freeze it.
A new government could also amend or repeal the legislation before it enters into force.
Formally, the attorney general’s current powers remain intact for now. Politically, however, the Knesset vote has already signaled a fundamental change in the relationship between Israel’s elected government and its most powerful legal gatekeeper.