Knesset Advances Bill to Split Attorney-General Role Amid Warnings of Democratic Strain

Lead

Israel’s parliament advanced a bill this week that would divide the powers of the attorney-general, a move that has drawn sharp warnings from the current officeholder about the health of the country’s democratic institutions. The legislation, which passed its first reading by a vote of 65-47, would separate the attorney-general’s advisory and prosecutorial functions and alter how the government interacts with its legal advisers and the courts. Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, speaking at an Israeli Bar Association conference, described the proposal as part of a broader pattern she characterized as democratic backsliding under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, pointing also to a second bill that would expand the authority of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and to the executive’s handling of Supreme Court rulings on military conscription for ultra-Orthodox men.

According to reporting from the Jerusalem Post, the bill was advanced by Religious Zionist Party MK Simcha Rothman through the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee. Dawn reported Baharav-Miara’s remarks, in which she said a race had begun “to eliminate democratic institutions” as the current Knesset term nears its end. The attorney-general, who also serves as the government’s legal adviser, has clashed repeatedly with the Netanyahu government since it took office in late 2022.

Coverage Comparison

Coverage of the developments reflects differing geographic and editorial vantage points. Dawn, drawing on the attorney-general’s public statements, centered its account on Baharav-Miara’s warning of democratic backsliding, her criticism of executive disregard for court rulings, and the parallel progress of two bills—one splitting the attorney-general’s role and another granting additional powers to the national security minister. The report linked these concerns to the government’s failure to implement Supreme Court directives requiring conscription of ultra-Orthodox men, noting Netanyahu’s political reliance on ultra-Orthodox parties.

The Jerusalem Post focused more closely on the mechanics and implications of the attorney-general bill itself. It detailed the 65-47 first-reading vote, explained the multiple functions currently concentrated in the single office, and outlined how the proposal would reshape relationships among the government, legal advisers, the prosecution service, and the courts. That outlet presented arguments from both supporters, who contend the change would return power to elected representatives, and critics, who argue it would weaken the attorney-general’s authority and undermine the rule of law. While both sources address the same legislative moment, Dawn emphasized institutional warnings and judicial non-compliance, whereas the Jerusalem Post concentrated on structural reform and competing political rationales.

Key Claims

• Israel’s attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, warned of democratic backsliding under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, citing threats to judicial independence and executive disregard for court rulings, according to Dawn.
• Two bills are moving through the Knesset: one to split the attorney-general’s powers by creating a prosecutor-general appointed by the justice minister, and another to grant National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir greater authority over the police, as reported by Dawn and referenced in broader coverage.
• The bill to split the attorney-general’s role passed its first reading by a vote of 65-47, according to the Jerusalem Post.
• The proposal would reshape the relationship between the government, its legal advisers, the prosecution, and the courts, per the Jerusalem Post.
• The attorney-general’s existing role combines functions as legal adviser to the government, interpreter of law for the executive, representative of the state in court, head of the state prosecution system, and final authority on major criminal decisions involving senior public officials, according to the Jerusalem Post.
• Supporters argue the bill would return power to the people by reducing concentration of authority in an unelected official; critics contend it would weaken the attorney-general’s authority and undermine the rule of law, as carried by the Jerusalem Post.
• The government has not implemented military conscription for the ultra-Orthodox community despite Supreme Court rulings, including a 2024 decision requiring conscription, Dawn reported, noting Netanyahu’s dependence on ultra-Orthodox coalition partners.
• Under the bill, the attorney-general would still present the state’s position in court, but the government would hold authority to determine that position, according to the Jerusalem Post; critics further argue this could allow the government to bypass independent legal review and advance legally indefensible positions as the state’s own.

Perspectives

Supporters of the legislation, including MK Simcha Rothman, frame the split as a necessary correction to an office that concentrates excessive power in one unelected figure and creates an inherent conflict when the same official both advises ministers and oversees potential criminal proceedings against them. They present the change as restoring democratic accountability by ensuring elected officials, rather than a single legal gatekeeper, set the government’s legal posture. The Jerusalem Post quoted the argument that splitting the role is “a necessary step to return power to the people.”

Critics, including Attorney General Baharav-Miara, view the bill as part of a wider effort that risks eroding institutional checks. In remarks reported by Dawn, she warned that government calls to disregard court rulings could lead the public to treat judicial decisions as non-binding. She specifically tied the attorney-general reform and the Ben Gvir powers bill to a late-term push against democratic institutions. Opponents further contend that making the attorney-general’s legal opinions non-binding and allowing the government to dictate the state’s courtroom position would remove an independent filter and enable the executive to advance positions that lack sound legal foundation.

A related flashpoint remains the ultra-Orthodox conscription issue. Dawn reported that the Supreme Court has repeatedly challenged exemptions and ruled in 2024 that the government must draft ultra-Orthodox men. Baharav-Miara cited the government’s inaction as evidence of broader disregard for court authority, while noting the political constraints facing Netanyahu, whose coalition depends on ultra-Orthodox parties that have long defended the exemption. The attorney-general’s office has argued it is legally untenable to increase the burden on those who serve while declining to enforce conscription obligations on others.

The bill’s first-reading passage marks an early legislative step; further readings and committee work would be required before any final enactment. As the Knesset term progresses, both the structural reform of the attorney-general’s office and the parallel measures on police powers and conscription compliance continue to test the boundaries between elected government authority and independent legal and judicial institutions in Israel.