Government Legal Advisor Gali Baharav Miara submitted a response to the industrialists' petition against the strike by the local government, the Ministry of Finance and the government, drawing the ire of Finance Minister Smotrich, who demanded to represent himself independently.
It turns out that the submission of the attorney general's response this week did not include consultation with the Minister of Finance, against whom the petition was filed, nor with Interior Minister Moshe Arbel. The conduct of the legal counsel on the issue, which became clear to the minister only this morning, led Smotrich this afternoon to inform Baharav Miara that he was not interested in her services in the petition.
The Attorney General did not consult with the Minister of Finance before submitting her response to the High Court of Justice, Photo: Oren Ben Hakon
"I read with astonishment the response of the 'State' presented yesterday by the High Court Department in the petition in question, which concerns the petition of the Manufacturers Association against the local government's decision to shut down its services or part of them as part of its struggle against the Arnona Fund Law promoted by the government as part of the Arrangements Law. This is a wild and illegal strike, which constitutes an abuse of power and a repudiation of the local government's duty towards its residents.
"The strike harms the public, industry and the economy, and it cannot be accepted that it is a legitimate tool in the power struggle of a handful of mayors against legitimate policies of the central government. The strike contradicts previous rulings of the Supreme Court and in my position is manifestly illegal."
"The strike hurts the public." Tel Aviv City Hall, Photo: Gideon Markowitz
Smotrich also wrote against the legal advice that "it was expected that as those who are responsible for representing the interests of the state and its citizens, interests of which are harmed as a result of the strike, you would not sit on the fence in some feeble, stuttering and twisting response, but would stand firm against the strike and demand its immediate stop.
"Your response, which was submitted on your own initiative and completely contrary to my position as Minister of Finance responding to the petition, without hearing my position in the discussion you held as requested by the Office of the Director General of my office (an outrageous fact that I learned only this morning), beyond not representing my position and the government's position, is liable to cause great future damage to the state and the public, should a judicial decision be made that will set a precedent that will determine that such a wild strike is a legitimate means of struggle against government and Knesset decisions."
Voting in the Finance Committee on the sections of the "Arnona Law", photo: Oren Ben Hakon
Smotrich also complains that the state's position was not presented to him or to the legal counsel in his office before it was submitted, despite the demand of the Legal Advisor at the Ministry of Finance, Assi Messing. "Moreover, despite the demand of the Office of the Director General of the Ministry's Attorney General, Assi Messing, that the state's position be presented to us before it is submitted, the final position was not presented to us and we received it as a surprise after it was submitted. It should be noted that I spoke this morning with the Minister of the Interior, who is also one of the respondents to the petition, and according to him, this position whose presentation contradicts his position and that he did not see or approve it before submitting it."
In conclusion, he writes, "An ordinary lawyer who would represent his client's interests in this way, refrain from defending them as much as he can, and does not even involve him in its formulation, would undoubtedly be embezzled in his position and not continue in it. This conduct, and the position you presented on whose behalf, which contradicts, as stated, my position as a respondent to the petition, raises once again the question of who exactly the State Attorney's Office represents, and with what authority it represents itself, contrary to the position of the relevant ministers and ministries.
Students demonstrate in front of the Knesset against the "Arnona Fund Law" // Credit: Student protest
"In the test of the outcome, I was again not given as a minister in charge of the court and was not given an opportunity to present my position and try to convince the court of it and contribute to the desired legal result. Absurdly, my day was not even given to me in your discussions as part of formulating the position, as if you were the "state." Therefore, I ask you to authorize me without delay a self-representation through which my position that categorically rejects the legality of the strike will be presented, to notify the court urgently and to request that the court wait with its decision until after my position is submitted."
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us