High Court of Justice Temporarily Halted Appointments Under the New Law Concerning Mahash
The High Court of Justice ordered Justice Minister Yariv Levin not to advance, at this stage, appointments under the new law concerning the Department for the Investigation of Police Officers—Mahash. The prohibition, which includes the appointment of the department’s head, will remain in effect until the court rules on the application for an interim order.
Key facts
- •Court: High Court of Justice
- •Responsible officeholder: Justice Minister Yariv Levin
- •Relief: temporary halt to appointments under the new law concerning Mahash
- •Term of office of the head of Mahash under the disputed mechanism: six years
- •Case number: not specified in the source
- •Date of decision: not specified in the source
What the Court Ruled
The court temporarily halted the appointment procedures for the officeholders designated under the new law concerning Mahash. This is temporary relief: it does not mean that the High Court of Justice has already ruled on the fate of the petitions filed or determined that the law is unconstitutional.
Who Is Petitioning Against the Law
The Movement for Quality Government filed the petition against the law. It asked to halt the appointments pending consideration of the objections to the new mechanism, arguing that advancing the process now could create irreversible facts that would be difficult to undo if the petitions are granted.
What Is at the Heart of the Dispute
The dispute concerns the mechanism for appointing the head of Mahash for a six-year term. According to the Movement for Quality Government, this arrangement gives the justice minister and the director general of the ministry decisive influence and could therefore impair the department’s professional independence.
What Happens Next
The parties must await the High Court of Justice’s decision on the application for an interim order. Until then, Yariv Levin is required to refrain from advancing appointments under the new law. The case number and the date on which the order was issued were not specified in the source.
What this means for you
Until the court issues a new decision, the head of Mahash cannot be appointed, nor can other appointments designated under the new law be advanced. For the public, this means preserving the existing situation during judicial review, but no final decision has yet been made regarding the legality of the new mechanism.
Find a lawyer for this topic
- Lawyers: Общая практика
- Lawyers in Тель-Авив
- Lawyers in Иерусалим
- Lawyers in Хайфа
- Lawyers in Ришон ле-Цион