
The Supreme Court today (Thursday) invalidated the clause in the law granting the National Security Minister the authority to set policy for investigations.
The judges decided not to interfere with other provisions of the law but emphasized that the police must operate independently and autonomously.
"The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the amendment does not diminish the police's duty to operate independently, professionally, and with autonomy. As for clause 8b, which states that the police are subordinate to the government, it was unanimously decided that it does not alter the relationship between the government and the police or detract from the police's duty to exercise professional and independent judgment."
"Additionally, the court unanimously determined that the amendment to clause 9 of the ordinance, under which the powers of the Commissioner are to be exercised 'in accordance with the policy directions and general principles of the Minister,' does not diminish the professional autonomy of the Commissioner. It was also determined that clause 8c(a) authorized the Minister to direct general and principal policy only and prohibits operational interference in police work," the judges wrote.
The invalidation of the clause was supported by former judge Uzi Fogelman, Acting President Yitzhak Amit, and judges Yael Vilner, Ofer Groskopf, and Yechiel Keshet. Judges Noam Solberg, Yosef Elron, Alex Stein, and Gila Kanfi-Steinitz opposed the invalidation.
The National Security Minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, harshly criticized the Supreme Court's ruling, claiming that it aimed to strip him of powers.
In a statement, Ben-Gvir said: "The Supreme Court once again acts like a sovereign and tramples on the voter's will. The severe decision to strip the Police Ordinance was intended to transfer control from the appointed minister to the prosecution and the Attorney General. In a democratic state, the one who sets the policy for the police is the minister in charge of it, yet this doesn't interest the Supreme Court obviously."
Justice Minister Yariv Levin also attacked the decision. "In what kind of country can judges who appoint themselves invalidate a law passed by the parliament in three readings by a narrow margin? Only in Israel is democracy being replaced by the rule of a handful of judges, who even refuse to hold a live broadcast of their corrupt selection processes.
Many now understand that this cannot continue. It is time to return authority to the sovereign - the people. I hope all coalition components will rise to the magnitude of the hour and finally allow the needed change in the selection process of judges," Levin said.