Israel’s Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, on Sunday canceled two Cabinet decisions that had made it easier to fire Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, and as a result also canceled her termination.
The seven justices ruled there were numerous procedural flaws in the government’s moves to change the mechanism for terminating the attorney general, moves that negated the government’s obligation to consult with a professional-public committee as a condition for dismissing her.
The court also fined the government the amount of the petitioners’ expenses totaling 90,000 shekels (~$28,000). The petitioners, who opposed the Cabinet’s decision and had asked the court to review it were the Yesh Atid Party and the Movement for Quality Government in Israel.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin sharply criticized the decision, saying it only proves that there are no conservative judges on the court, only “activists and extremist activists.”
“There is no court in the world that would impose on a government an attorney general in whom it has no confidence, and who was unanimously dismissed by all members of the government,” he said.
On Aug. 4, the Cabinet voted unanimously to fire Baharav-Miara under its new procedures. The Supreme Court ruled that decision could not take effect until the justices reviewed the procedure and the reasons for her dismissal.
While the Cabinet has the authority to fire an attorney general, in the past the decision could only be made after a recommendation by a public professional committee composed of justices, lawyers, academics and ministers.
However, in a unanimous decision on June 8, the Israeli Cabinet approved a proposal to circumvent the independent committee responsible for appointing and firing attorney generals.
The new procedure entailed the justice minister submitting a request to a committee composed of five government ministers. That committee would hold a hearing and vote whether or not to dismiss the attorney general, after which the result would be brought before the full Cabinet, where it would need to pass with the backing of at least 75% of ministers.
‘Substantial differences of opinion with the government’
On July 20, the committee, led by Minister of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism Amichai Chikli, voted to recommend that the government fire the attorney general.
Chikli said that the calls for the AG’s firing came against the backdrop of “inappropriate conduct and substantial and prolonged differences of opinion between the government and the attorney general, creating a situation that prevents effective cooperation.”
That led to the government’s Aug. 4 vote to fire her followed by the Supreme Court’s ruling to put the dismissal on hold.
“[N]o changes will take place in the powers of the attorney general or her working relationship with the government,” Supreme Court Deputy President Noam Sohlberg wrote in an Aug. 4 ruling.
Baharav-Miara has continued to function as the attorney general throughout the process.
Israel’s governing coalition has been at loggerheads with the attorney general since its election on Nov. 1, 2022. The adversarial relationship only sharpened after the government’s failed judicial reform effort in 2023, which would have curtailed the attorney general’s power.
In November 2024, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tasked Justice Minister Levin with finding a solution to what he said was the ongoing opposition of Baharav-Miara to his government.
Baharav-Miara had been appointed to the post by the previous government led by then-Premier Naftali Bennett in 2022.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid, chairman of the Yesh Atid Party, praised Sunday’s decision. “I congratulate the High Court of Justice for unanimously accepting the petition filed by the Yesh Atid faction and preventing the illegal dismissal of the attorney general. We will continue to fight for the rule of law in Israel.”
For decades, the attorney general position was considered a “legal adviser to the government” (the literal translation of the Israeli office holder’s title from Hebrew) and was expected to be in political sympathy with it, bearing more similarity to the U.S. attorney general than at present.
However, with time, the position gained greater independence, starting with Attorney General Meir Shamgar (1968-1975), expanding under Attorney General Aharon Barak (1975-1978) and finally transforming into a powerful post by a 1993 Israeli Supreme Court ruling, when Shamgar was president of the Supreme Court and Barak was one of its justices.
