The tactical game of Saar and the unresolved questions: Behind the scenes of the election of the next ombudsman

In a clever strategic move, the justice minister immediately announced his three candidates to replace Mandelblit, and it would be unlikely if one of them was not finally appointed.

Saar will be happy if his surprising candidate passes the search committee, but there are two classic candidates on the list for more security

Welcome read

16/12/2021

Thursday, December 16, 2021, 9:15 p.m.

• Share on Facebook

• Share on WhatsApp

• Share on Twitter

• Share on Email

• Share on general

• Comments

  Comments

Justice Minister Gideon Saar surprised this week, when a day after the first meeting of the Attorney General's Committee, he already announced three of his own candidates for the next attorney general. In practice, Saar has in effect promised that one of these three candidates (unless he adds another candidate of his own later), will win this powerful position.Small

background: Until the late 1990s, an attorney general was simply elected by a justice minister, who would bring his choice For approval by the Israeli government, the decision to establish a search committee for the position of attorney general was made following the ugly farce of the Bar-On-Hebron affair, which centered on suspicion of irrelevant motives behind the election of the attorney general (Netanyahu's first government).

The government then adopted the recommendation of a professional committee headed by former Supreme Court President Meir Shamgar, according to which it is a balanced and independent locating committee that will submit to the Minister of Justice candidates for the position of Attorney General.

It was decided that the committee would be chaired by a retired Supreme Court justice, and would include a government representative (former Minister of Justice, or former Attorney General), a Knesset representative, a lawyer elected by the National Council of Advocates, and an academic representative elected by a main forum Faculties of Law.

The Minister of Justice, the Prime Minister, and each of the members of the Committee have the right to nominate candidates for the Committee.

In principle, the committee is supposed to refer to the Minister of Justice a candidate who has received at least four votes out of the five members of the committee.

A smart strategic move.

Gideon Saar with Spokesman Mandelblit (Photo: Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel)

The first minister on whose behalf such a search committee was set up was Yosef Lapid in the Sharon government, at the end of 2003. This was a particularly tense period as it was clear that the adviser chosen would be required to decide the fate of the indictment left by former State Attorney Edna Arbel against then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon , In the Greek island portfolio. Lapid's first choice was his personal friend, Adv. Eli Zohar. Pretty soon, Lapid realized that Zohar would not get the required majority, so he brought in an alternative candidate, Adv. As an active attorney.

In his ordeal, Lapid turned into the system, and proposed to the committee the Deputy Attorney General for Advisory and Legislative Affairs, Menachem Mazuz.

It was the first legal adviser in the history of the Ministry of Justice who was a real creator of the system, the first adviser to grow up in Salah a-Din.

All his predecessors were parachuted from parallel systems, from jurisdiction or from academia.

There was no such adviser until Mazuz, nor did he come after him.

As it seems at the moment, the second adviser who grew up within the system will actually be appointed under a storm of office.

We will return to this interesting point later.

More on Walla!

The legal advice system needs something it has been missing for a long time: a manager

To the full article

The next two ministers whose choice of adviser fell on duty were Yaakov Ne'eman (2010), and Ayelet Shaked (2016).

Both chose not to exercise their right to nominate a candidate for the committee.

Of course it was not an innocent act here, but a tactical sophistication of a teacher and his student, both political foxes.

After Yehuda Weinstein was elected to the post in 2010, Ne'eman boasted that Weinstein was his original candidate, but refrained from announcing it, because, he said, if he did - he would have hurt his chances of being elected (partly because Ne'eman was close to Lieberman, and the elected adviser is The one who was supposed to decide whether to file an indictment against him).

Therefore, Ne'eman explained, it would have been preferable for others on the committee to propose Weinstein, while he, Ne'eman, would manipulate the committee members from the outside.

Shaked followed in the footsteps of a teacher and a rabbi.

She, too, like Ne'eman, was then fully coordinated with Netanyahu (there were days), and paved the way for the election of Avichai Mandelblit (later a legend developed that at the last minute Netanyahu wanted another candidate, Guy Rothkopf. I was not convinced).

Out of three comes one

Saar, as mentioned, decided to go the other way, and it seems like a correct tactical decision in light of the composition of the search committee. Explain: After failing to retain Meir Sheetrit as the government's representative on the committee (a scandalous appointment that did not survive the silence fee affair), Saar decided that of the options before him - as stated, the government's representative must be a former justice minister or legal adviser - the most reasonable option for him Is to appoint Dan Meridor. The reason that Meridor was not Saar's first choice is that while Meridor was the Minister of Justice of the Yitzhak Shamir government, he was less committed to the agenda of the current Minister of Justice. Meridor, when it comes to the justice system, he continues Begin's path and is very close in his ideological views to the liberal-activist current in the Supreme Court.

This created a situation in which the five members of the committee, Saar somehow - and even this is not certain - can rely on only three: a member of his party, Zvi Hauser;

Prof. Ron Shapira, representative of the academy (whose ideological views on the scope of the consultant's powers go even further);

And Adv. Tami Ullman, the lawyer's representative, who as a veteran defense attorney would probably want to see far-reaching reforms in the system, as Saar would like to see.

The editor who is attentive to the political echelon.

Raz Nizri (Photo: Official Website, Liav Peled)

On the other hand, the committee's chairman, former Supreme Court president Asher Grunis, is conservative in his views but very meticulous in examining the candidates. Netanyahu - a close relationship in Grunis' eyes. If only he had known then how this relationship would end.

In this state of affairs Saar realized that it was not right for him to follow the path of Shaked and Ne'eman, since then he might lose all control over the appointment of the next adviser.

Instead he decided to control the situation, and put before the committee three candidates who would have a hard to unfair committee to ignore.

As stated, the only time the locating committee discussed a minister's candidate (Yosef Lapid), it did everything to fulfill its desires.

Even after providing two unsuitable candidates, she allowed him a third chance.

Easy and material in our case.

The list that Saar presented to the committee created a reality in which a decision not to recommend even one of them would be made as a manifestly unreasonable decision.

The big question

This is because of the candidates' classic background: First, whoever is not elected from them will actually be the second adviser in history to emerge within the Ministry of Justice.

Raz Nizri and Roi Sheindorf are the creators of the system.

Nizri served four legal advisers to the government, two as an assistant and two as a deputy (first for criminal matters and then for constitutional matters and special positions), and Sheindorf grew up in the firm as an expert in international affairs, first in the State Attorney's Office and later in legal advice.

She grew up in the Tel Aviv District Attorney's Office, but also had experience in the private sector.

In Rabbi Miara (Photo: Official Website, Eyal Yitzhar, Globes)

The case of the surprising candidate, Gali Bahrav-Myara, is a little more complex. Harav-Miara grew up in the Tel Aviv District Attorney's Office and specialized in administrative and civil areas. Her most recent position was the District Attorney (Civil), where she served for eight years. A few years ago, she retired from the public service and joined the office of Adv. David Tadmor. If so, on the one hand the candidate grew up in the system; The private.

It is certainly possible to estimate that in Rabbi Miara she will be among the recommendations of the search committee, she will be the one to be chosen for the coveted position.

The main reasons for this are two.

First of all, Bhavar-Myara's unique background interested Saar.

As you may recall, he promised far-reaching reforms to the system.

His interest in her grew especially when she voiced in his ears opinions that might help him realize from within even part of his vision, which is pretty much stuck in the meantime, to split the Attorney General's roles.

The second reason is that he will be elected to be the first woman in Israel to receive the title of Attorney General.

This process, too, should not be taken lightly, given the fact that Saar is trying to build a unique political base around it, while often expressing itself on women's rights issues.

International expert.

Roi Sheindorf (Photo: official website, gov.il)

The big question, to which the answer is really unclear, is whether you will pass the filter of the locating committee in Rabbi Miara. The difficulty in choosing her is that she has no real background in any of the counselor's two most significant roles - the criminal field and the constitutional field. It is true that for years she managed the administrative department of the Tel Aviv District Attorney's Office, and there is still a long way to go between dealing with administrative cases in the District Attorney's Office and dealing with current high courts, or large criminal cases.

The defenders of Bahra-Miara's candidacy claim, with a great deal of justice, that Sheindorf's background in international affairs is much niche in its own right, and that Sharaz Nazri comes with vast experience in the criminal and constitutional fields, but on the other hand has gained many years , And in his career he never wore a black cloak and did not smell the courts from within.

Besides, argue the supporters of Rabbi Miara, it should be remembered that professors from the academy (Aharon Barak and Yitzhak Zamir) who had no systemic background, jurists like Mazuz who had no background in the criminal field, or alternatively like Weinstein, who had no background, were also appointed In public-constitutional law.

Stabilize the system after the shake

Saar would be happy to surprise with Bahar-Miara, but because he took into account the unfounded possibility that she would not win four fingers of the committee members, he placed among the candidates two members of the system. Between Sheindorf and Nazari, the latter seems to have the upper hand. Beyond his rich experience in all areas of consulting, he is perceived as a system man on the one hand, but on the other hand as a very attentive official, as a worldview, to the political echelon, and very conservative in his positions. In some famous criminal cases he is considered to have a more careful approach than his colleagues. The best-selling of these is the 4000 case, in which, in a minority opinion in the system, he believed that the offense of breach of trust should be satisfied and not an indictment should be filed against Netanyahu with the bribery clause. Weinstein).

We have written here before about the qualities of management and leadership that the committee must take into account among its considerations.

The committee, on the one hand, must decide which of the candidates will be able to stabilize the system after the devastating upheaval it experienced during the period of the formation of the Alpine portfolios and the violent attempts of the Netanyahu administration to harm it as much as possible.

On the other hand, the next counselor should not be addicted to paranoia (even if it is justified), because this addiction has led the system for years to the illusory effects of line crowding and arrogant and detached conduct.

Therefore, the committee should locate not only the most suitable consultant, according to the initial list of criteria she brought from home, but also the man who has the courage and ability to bring about significant changes in the system.

• news

• News in Israel

• Criminal news and law

Tags

• Gideon Saar

• Attorney General

• Raz Nazri