>> Read the full position paper in pdf
In a position paper written for Zulat for Equality and Human Rights, Adv. Eitay Mack reviews the government’s use of temporary appointments to senior positions in the Civil Service in a way that harms its professionalism. This system enables the assignment of jobs to cronies who lack the proper qualifications for a permanent appointment and damages the functioning of the professional echelon and the public’s trust in it. In order to reduce this phenomenon, Zulat proposes to tighten the selection of candidates for temporary appointments and to add as a default the requirement to consult with a Civil Service committee or other relevant bodies (as established by law and in government resolutions), so their advice to the government/minister should be based on the professional and ethical competence required for the said position and on the fact that it is a temporary assignment.
The position paper was written in the aftermath of the government’s approval of the appointment of Israel Police Superintendent Kobi Yaakobi, a crony of Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and the Likud, as Israel Prison Service’s Acting Commissioner despite his lack of experience on the subject of incarceration, as well as Minister David Amsalem’s decision to appoint Yanki Quint as the Government Companies Authority‘s Acting Director.
Temporary appointments are not a new invention, but the phenomenon intensified in recent years due to the coronavirus crisis and the political upheaval stemming from the indictments against Prime Minister Netanyahu for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud. This system clashes head-on with the basic conception of public administration in Israel, which sees the Civil Service as a professional and apolitical entity derived from its status as a trustee of the public.
The option of temporary appointments is anchored in the Civil Service Regulations and in the Appointments Law. Up until the enactment of Amendment No. 15 in 2010, a ministry director or a government-approved officeholder could be replaced by a temporary appointee for a three-month period only. After the amendment, a minister may initially name a temporary appointee for a period not exceeding three months in consultation with the Civil Service Commissioner, and after consulting with the latter, he may extend it for a period that does not exceed six months. In addition, with the consent of the Commissioner and the Attorney General, a minister may notify the government of the extension of the temporary assignment beyond the aforementioned six months, should special circumstances justify it and for the duration of those circumstances.
In the wake of the amendment, the government/ministers have often chosen the “creative solution” of temporarily appointing patently politically-affiliated candidates for up to six months, in order to validate future appointments that do away with basic eligibility conditions and with professional opinions ruling the candidate unfit for a permanent appointment.
For fear of inappropriate and unworthy temporary appointments made for political-personal reasons and contrary to the public interest, Zulat proposes to amend Article 23a of the Appointments Law, to include as a default the obligation to conduct a professional and ethical examination of the suitability of temporary appointees by a Civil Service committee or other relevant bodies, taking into account the requirements of the position and the fact that it is a temporary assignment.