Bill Proposal: Ombudsman of the Israeli Judiciary (Amendment – Appointment of the Ombudsman), 2024

The proposed bill, which would change the selection process of the Ombudsman - responsible for investigating complaints about the conduct of judges and religious court judges - aims to intimidate judges and undermine their independence.

Photo by Chaim Goldberg/Flash90

Current Situation

The role of the Ombudsman of the Israeli Judiciary is to investigate complaints about the conduct of judges and religious court judges in the course of their duties. The Ombudsman has the authority to recommend filing disciplinary complaints and, in extreme cases, even to recommend the dismissal of judges.

Currently, the Ombudsman for Complaints Against Judges is appointed by the Judges Selection Committee, with candidates being determined by mutual agreement between the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court.

The eligibility requirements for the Ombudsman are low, as the existing agreement-based mechanism is supposed to ensure that the candidate is suitable for the position. To date, only retired Supreme Court justices have held this position.

What Does MK Rothman’s New Proposal Establish?

Initially, MK Rothman proposed that the Ombudsman be appointed through a secret ballot in the Knesset, requiring a majority of 70 Knesset members. He has now presented an alternative proposal, under which the Ombudsman would be appointed by a new selection committee that would include two ministers, one Knesset member, the National Public Defender, a retired judge selected by the justices of the Supreme Court, a retired court judge chosen the presidents of the district courts, and a retired rabbinical court judge chosen by the two chief rabbis.

In summary, the committee would include seven members, three political representatives (probably all of them from the coalition), a rabbinical judge chosen by the two Chief Rabbis, meaning with political affiliation, and only three independent professional representatives.

What Are the Issues with the Bill?

1. The proposal seeks to turn appointing the Ombudsman into a political and even coalition-driven process. This is an attempt by the political majority to take control of an institution that holds disciplinary and ethical authority over judges and could turn the Ombudsman’s position into a tool for exerting political pressure on the judiciary. The proposed committee has a majority of members with political affiliations and even a coalition majority in cases where the Chief Rabbis are affiliated with coalition parties.
2. The proposal undermines the principle of judicial independence and is therefore unconstitutional. Appointing a political Ombudsman would harm judicial autonomy due to the Ombudsman’s disciplinary and ethical powers and the political influence that would be exerted, leading to political pressure on judges in their rulings. This means that the bill infringes on the principle of judicial independence, which is enshrined in Section 2 of Basic Law: The Judiciary, and therefore, if passed, it would be unconstitutional.
3. This constitutes a change in the appointment process while the appointment is ongoing. The Ombudsman appointment process has been stalled for over a year due to disagreements between the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court. However, for more than six months, the Minister of Justice has refused to meet with the President of the Supreme Court and now he does not even recognize him, thereby preventing the possibility of reaching an agreement. This shows that the crisis in appointing the Ombudsman is an artificial pretext created by the Minister of Justice to bypass the existing arrangement.
4. The already low eligibility requirements set by law would allow the appointment of a legal professional lacking sufficient experience for the sensitive and vital role of the Ombudsman.

In conclusion, the bill aims to intimidate judges and undermine their independence by appointing a politically affiliated and unprofessional Ombudsman, all while the appointment process is ongoing.