>> Click here to read the full Position Paper
This document addresses three legislative proposals to split the powers of the Attorney General, which were submitted to the Knesset as private members bills, endorsed by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation, and approved in a preliminary reading on 29 October 2025: Bill for Amendment of the Attorney General Law-2022, submitted by MK Hanoch Milwidsky; Bill for Splitting the Position of Attorney General-2024, submitted by MK Michel Buskila; and Bill for Splitting the Position of Attorney General-2025, submitted by MK Simcha Rothman and others.
Their wording suggests that their sole purpose is to emasculate the current Attorney General, to eliminate the independent status of the legal counseling institution, and to subordinate it to the government. A perusal of the bills shows that they are not based on any substantive discussion about splitting the position, even though the Attorney General’s status, functions, and powers were reviewed at length by two public panels (the 1962 Agranat Commission and the Shamgar Commission, which presented its recommendations in 1998) as well other studies on the subject.
Not only are these bills not intended to address fundamental structural or principled questions concerning the institution of Attorney General and State Prosecutor, but should be seen as an integral part of the Israeli government’s broader regime revolution seeking to place all branches of government under the dominance of the political echelon.
The purpose of these bills is to harm the law enforcement authorities, first and foremost the Attorney General, for two main reasons: first, because the incumbent Gali Baharav-Miara continues to stand as a bulwark against the government’s intention to change Israel’s system of government and its daily efforts to undermine the foundational principles of the democratic system; and second, as an attempt to disrupt, and implicitly even annul, the criminal proceedings against Prime Minister Netanyahu, which he and his close associates have been doing their utmost to derail.
The document sets out the reasons why the three bills under consideration should be rejected outright, primarily because they fail to ensure the independence of the Attorney General and State Prosecutor from political influence, and also because they do not condition appointment to these positions on the requisite qualifications.
In light of the above, here are Zulat’s recommendations:
- Reject any proposal seeking to change the structure of the institution of Attorney General at this time, as such proposals are intended to undermine the standing of Gali Baharav-Miara, to further advance the regime revolution, and to interfere with the proceedings against Prime Minister Netanyahu, who is standing trial on criminal charges.
- Enact legislation to strengthen the independence of the institution of Attorney General and State Prosecutor, and to entrench in law the status of the Attorney General as guardian of the rule of law and as the authority whose legal interpretation is binding on all branches of government, up until it is ruled otherwise by the courts.