The following is the text of a private letter sent by Attorney-General Elyakim Rubenstein to Prime Minister Ehud Barak five days ago, as read aloud on Israel Radio this afternoon by correspondent Michael Tuchfeld (with thanks to IMRA \"www.imra.org.il\"):
Prime Minister Ehud Barak:
While there is no legal limitation on a government during an election period, the legal consideration is not the central one. The instructions of the law are designed only to prevent the creation of a vacuum in authority - and not for the setting of dramatic, fateful, all-encompassing changes such as an agreement with the Palestinians.
There is a great distance between the paralysis of the government that the promulgators of the law wished to avoid, and dramatic moves.
An election-eve agreement with the Palestinians should be such that it does not raise even the suspicion that it was subject to time-related considerations - namely, election considerations. Thus, great care and constant awareness of these suspicions is required, and even more so in the case of a minority government whose prime minister has resigned.
The agreement being negotiated is different than all its predecessors. This one deals with the setting of the borders of the nation, the extent of its capital, including concessions in territory, and including, to my great sorrow, the tearing apart of the nation both by the decision and its implementation. [These are] decisions that will be difficult to withdraw from. All of these are great reasons for much care to be taken.
I raise doubt as to the moral authority of the government while the resigned prime minister awaits re-election, and when the president of the United States, who is acting as midwife for the agreement, will no longer bear any responsibility for the implementation of the agreement since his days at the White House are over - and [because] the operative meaning of the agreement will be the removal of settlements, dramatic changes in Jerusalem that cut into the very essence of the city, etc.
The government is the representative of the entire public, and thus should carefully weigh heavy nation-dividing decisions made during its waning hours. I bring to your attention the laws enacted in the Knesset protecting Jerusalem, and the law requiring a majority of 61 for changes in the borders of the sovereign territory of Israel. Such diplomatic agreements must be presented to the Knesset for approval, and considering the current parliamentary situation it can be assumed that this would not be done before the elections, but rather upon the establishment of a new government.
I also raise doubt as to the ability of the Palestinians to honor the agreement, both from a security standpoint and in terms of their willingness to maintain true legal relations with Israel.
I oppose the agreement regarding the Temple Mount. I doubt that there is room for expecting generosity from the Palestinians in their recognizing our connection to the Temple Mount.
I do not want to put barriers against the efforts for peace, but it is my obligation to say what I have said.
Elyakim Rubenstein,
Attorney-General
Prime Minister Ehud Barak:
While there is no legal limitation on a government during an election period, the legal consideration is not the central one. The instructions of the law are designed only to prevent the creation of a vacuum in authority - and not for the setting of dramatic, fateful, all-encompassing changes such as an agreement with the Palestinians.
There is a great distance between the paralysis of the government that the promulgators of the law wished to avoid, and dramatic moves.
An election-eve agreement with the Palestinians should be such that it does not raise even the suspicion that it was subject to time-related considerations - namely, election considerations. Thus, great care and constant awareness of these suspicions is required, and even more so in the case of a minority government whose prime minister has resigned.
The agreement being negotiated is different than all its predecessors. This one deals with the setting of the borders of the nation, the extent of its capital, including concessions in territory, and including, to my great sorrow, the tearing apart of the nation both by the decision and its implementation. [These are] decisions that will be difficult to withdraw from. All of these are great reasons for much care to be taken.
I raise doubt as to the moral authority of the government while the resigned prime minister awaits re-election, and when the president of the United States, who is acting as midwife for the agreement, will no longer bear any responsibility for the implementation of the agreement since his days at the White House are over - and [because] the operative meaning of the agreement will be the removal of settlements, dramatic changes in Jerusalem that cut into the very essence of the city, etc.
The government is the representative of the entire public, and thus should carefully weigh heavy nation-dividing decisions made during its waning hours. I bring to your attention the laws enacted in the Knesset protecting Jerusalem, and the law requiring a majority of 61 for changes in the borders of the sovereign territory of Israel. Such diplomatic agreements must be presented to the Knesset for approval, and considering the current parliamentary situation it can be assumed that this would not be done before the elections, but rather upon the establishment of a new government.
I also raise doubt as to the ability of the Palestinians to honor the agreement, both from a security standpoint and in terms of their willingness to maintain true legal relations with Israel.
I oppose the agreement regarding the Temple Mount. I doubt that there is room for expecting generosity from the Palestinians in their recognizing our connection to the Temple Mount.
I do not want to put barriers against the efforts for peace, but it is my obligation to say what I have said.
Elyakim Rubenstein,
Attorney-General