Weakening the Attorney General Weakens Human Rights
- ACRI
- Jul 9
- 3 min read
The Attorney General (Legal Opinions, Representation and Oversight) Bill, 2026 is currently being advanced in the Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, and seeks to fundamentally change the status of the Attorney General. On July 8, 2026, ACRI submitted an appeal to the Knesset Legal Advisor and the Government Legal Advisor, warning that the bill is unconstitutional, and undermines one of the central mechanisms protecting human rights in Israel.
In the appeal, Attorney Oded Feller, ACRI's Legal Advisor, explains that the harm to the Attorney General’s independence under the bill stems from three processes:
A governmental override mechanism for legal opinions: Section 4 of the bill ostensibly provides that a written legal opinion issued by the Attorney General shall be regarded as reflecting the law applicable for the executive branch. However, Section 5 effectively renders this rule meaningless by allowing the government to decide, if it “sees reason to do so,” that the legal opinion is not binding on it or other bodies within the executive branch.
A mechanism for external representation and silencing the Attorney General: Sections 6–10 of the bill alter the existing model of legal representation. The government would be able to determine the executive branch’s position in legal proceedings and appoint external counsel if the Attorney General determines that the government’s position cannot be presented, or if a minister believes the position is not being presented properly. The bill would also allow the government, or a person acting on its behalf, to prevent the Attorney General from appearing before the court without prior authorization.
A mechanism for governmental-ministerial oversight: Section 15 of the bill states that the Attorney General is accountable to the government for the performance of their duties and is subject to oversight by the Minister of Justice on the government’s behalf, including reporting on their activities, subject to certain exceptions.
Each of three mechanisms raises constitutional concerns on its own. Together, however, they make fundamental, structural changes to the nature of the role of the Attorney General, weakens the system of checks and balances, and enables the government to bypass the Attorney General whenever the Attorney General’s position is inconvenient, whether at the stage of legal advice, legal representation, and ongoing political oversight. The bill thereby replaces the role of an independent gatekeeper with an adviser whose position depends on the government’s level of satisfaction.
In our appeal, we emphasized that the Attorney General and the broader system of legal advice constitute the first line of defense against unlawful government decisions and violations of human rights by public authorities. While only a small proportion of government decisions are ultimately subject to judicial review, thousands of decisions are made every year within government ministries, the security establishment, the police, and other state authorities. In many of these cases, it is internal legal oversight that prevents violations of human rights. The changes proposed in the bill may increase the risk of human rights violations in almost every field, including freedom of expression, freedom of protest, the right to due process, the right to privacy, the right to equality, the rights to health and welfare, and protection against the disproportionate exercise of governmental power. Legislation whose infringement on human rights is certain is inconsistent with democratic values and serves no legitimate purpose.
If the bill continues to advance and is ultimately approved by the Knesset plenum, we intend to file a petition for its revocation with the Supreme Court.
ACRI’s appeal, July 8, 2026 (Heb)
