A Review of the Moves Designed to Weaken Israeli Democracy: Working Document
Knesset Summer Session: April 2025 to July 24, 2025
Photo by Yonatan Sindel/Flash90
The months of this year’s summer session in the Knesset were marked by a significant acceleration of steps that undermine the foundations of democracy in Israel. These measures, unfolding while 50 hostages are still held in Gaza, centered around extra-parliamentary actions, and first and foremost, efforts to weaken gatekeepers by advancing the dismissal of the attorney general and the head of the Shin Bet, utilizing new firing and hiring mechanisms unshackled by the legal safeguards that have been formulated over the years to ensure the independence of these gatekeepers and to preserve proper governance. Alongside these actions were efforts to take over other gatekeeping institutions, such as the Civil Service Commissioner.
At the same time, threats against the judicial system have intensified, including a growing threat from government ministers and Knesset members not to comply with the High Court’s orders. This public atmosphere was also reflected in the disorder during Supreme Court hearings, caused by the audience, which compelled the Court to interrupt and halt the proceedings and the smashing of a window in the court with a non-lethal weapon. In addition, there was vocal support from ministers and coalition Knesset members for the cancellation of the Prime Minister’s criminal trial (against the backdrop of the statement made by the President of the United States). This support also included accusations against the law enforcement system, as part of the growing trend of undermining the independence of the judicial system in Israel.
Within the Knesset and its committees, bills that harm the rule of law and basic rights have been advanced. These include proposals to politicize the Police Internal Investigations Department (PIID), expand the authority of the religious courts, curtail freedom of expression, and weaken both public media and academia. In addition, attempts were made to weaken the parliamentary opposition.
Furthermore, a large number of far-reaching private member’s bills were approved by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation, against the legal opinion of the attorney general’s office. This phenomenon reflects a further weakening of the rule of law, in that insufficient consideration is given to professional discussion at one of the critical stages in the legislative process for private bills. The approval of these bills may herald a change in the accepted approach that the Ministerial Committee for Legislation is essentially responsible for filtering and blocking extreme or problematic bills. Instead, in recent months, professional considerations have been shunted aside in favor of political considerations, even when the bills presented have not undergone even a minimal preparation process.
However, to date only a small number of bills have actually been approved in this session, and even those proposals approved by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation have not been advanced in practice in the Knesset. Had it not been for the voting boycott by the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties, it is likely that most of the bills would have been advanced faster (indeed, a significant number of bills were removed from the Knesset agenda after having been scheduled, due to the boycott).
This period was also characterized by the escalation of the state of emergency in light of the war with Iran and the intensification of fighting in Gaza, along with the opening of other fronts whose status remains unclear, such as Lebanon and Syria. This has made it easier to restrict rights and expand government powers (with almost no parliamentary oversight), while the public attention is focused on the war. Under the state of emergency, steps have been taken that violate basic rights, particularly the right to protest, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press.
Advancing the dismissal of the Attorney General. In June, the government unanimously approved a proposal to abolish the existing mechanism for dismissing the attorney general, and in August, she was fired under this new mechanism. The original mechanism for dismissal, which dates back to 2000, stipulates that dismissal of the attorney general requires consultation with a public-professional committee, to ensure the independence and professionalism of the attorney general’s office. Instead, a new, entirely political mechanism was established, whose members are only serving ministers. In practice, this mechanism ensures exclusive control for the government over the dismissal of the attorney general.Letter from Deputy Attorney General (Public-Administrative Law) Adv. Dr. Gil Limon, to Attorney General Adv. Gali Baharav Miara, titled “The decision-makers’ proposal regarding ‘Ways and conditions for the appointment and dismissal of the attorney general—Amendment of the government decision’“ (June 8, 2025); Zvi Zerahia, “The government approved the process of impeaching the attorney general; Baharav Miara: ‘The decision is illegal,’“ Calcalist 8.6.2025; Guy Lurie and Amir Fuchs, “Opinion: Changing the process for impeaching the attorney general” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 1, 2025).
The Attorney General did not appear at the hearing, but sent a letter in which she clarified that the government’s decision was unlawful, and that the consequence of establishing the political committee was that the attorney general and the state prosecution would become “an institution that depends on the goodwill of the political echelon.”
On July 17, 2025, the Ministerial Committee formulated a proposal to vote in favor of dismissing the attorney general.
On August 4th, the government voted to fire the Attorney General. The HCJ froze her dismissal and will hear the petitions against her dismissal on September 3, 2025.
Dismissing the head of the Shin Bet in violation of the law and amid a conflict of interest. The HCJ ruled, by majority opinion,HCJ 54321-03-25, Movement for Quality Government in Israel v. Government of Israel (May 21, 2025). It should be noted that Vice President Sohlberg agreed that the dismissal process raises significant difficulties, but believes that due to the resignation of the head of the Shin Bet, the court hearing became redundant and there was no need to decide on the issues raised by the petitions. See Amichai Cohen and Eran Shamir-Borer, “Explainer: The Supreme Court ruling on the dismissal of the head of the Shin Bet and the appointment of a new Shin Bet head—principles and significance” (Israel Democracy Institute, June 4, 2025). that the government’s decision to dismiss the head of the Shin Bet was invalid, because the dismissal process was conducted in contravention of the law and under a conflict of interest. In its ruling, the High Court of Justice noted that the head of the Shin Bet is a “significant gatekeeper” whose duty of loyalty is to the public, and not to the political echelon.
Disregarding binding legal directives from the Attorney General, a trend that reached new heights during the current session. A clear example of this was the Prime Minister’s decision to appoint Major General (res.) David Zini as head of the Shin Bet, contrary to the Attorney General’s directive. In July, the High Court of Justice approved an agreement according to which, in 60 days, and after the conclusion of the investigations that place the Prime Minister in a conflict of interest, the Prime Minister will be able to appoint any candidate for the position of head of the Shin Bet, and the candidacy will be examined by the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee.HCJ 18133-06-25, Goili v. Deputy Attorney General (Legal, Public-Administrative) (Decision of July 13, 2025).
Advancing legislative proposals to weaken the institution of the attorney general:
- A bill to split the role of the attorney general. A proposal to separate the powers of legal counsel from those of criminal prosecution, and empowering the minister of justice to appoint the prosecutor general, subject to the approval of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee of the Knesset, without subordination to the attorney general and without a professional search committee. The bill sits alongside no fewer than 24 other bills proposed by the coalition that seek to undermine the independence of the attorney general’s office.For more information on these legislative proposals, see Demonitor, the Israel Democracy Institute’s database on democratic retreat in Israel.
- A bill aiming to detach the legal advisors to government ministries from the attorney general, who serves as is the professional authority guiding their work.Independence, Status and Powers of Legal Advisors to Government Ministries Law, 2025, P/5782/25. This proposal, if passed, would severely harm the independence of the entire system of legal counsel to the government, and its ability to ensure the rule of law, as well as the ability of government ministries to function, in the absence of a uniform legal policy (independent of political needs).Edna Harel Fisher and Guy Lurie, “Opinion: The Independence of Legal Advisors to Government Ministries Law” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 3, 2025).
Advancing a bill to expand the powers of religious courts. The Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee has approved for first reading a bill that seeks to grant the rabbinical and Sharia courts the authority to rule in civil disputes through arbitration, subject to the written consent of both parties. This proposal, is liable to harm the unity of the law and the legitimacy of the state judicial system in Israel, and there is a real concern that in many cases, especially in situations of power disparities or disadvantaged populations, it will not be possible to ensure that genuine informed consent will indeed be given to participation in arbitration.Anat Thon Ashkenazy and Daphne Benvenisty, “Supplementary opinion on the question of informed consent in the updated version of the Religious Courts Jurisdiction (Arbitration) Bill submitted by the chair of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee” (Israel Democracy Institute, June 30, 2025); Mordechai Kremnitzer, Anat Thon Ashkenazy, Amir Fuchs, and Daphne Benvenisty, “Expanding the powers of the religious courts is a violation of the rule of law” (Israel Democracy Institute, December 3, 2024).
Removing MK Edelstein as chair of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. The Likud faction voted in favor of removing MK Edelstein from his position as chair of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee following disagreements regarding the military conscription law under discussion in the Committee. It is extremely rare for a committee chair to be replaced for political reasons—in this case, as punishment for advancing the government’s policy.Avital Friedman, “Review: The impeachment of Yuli Edelstein: When and how to dismiss a Knesset Committee chairman” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 23, 2025). This step illustrates the erosion of the Knesset’s independence, with Knesset members being punished for their independent views even when they hold posts that are clearly parliamentary in nature.
Enacting emergency regulations unlawfully and via an expedited procedure. On July 23, 2025, the government enacted emergency regulations, contrary to a HCJ t ruling stating that the authority to enact emergency regulations is granted only when, as a result of a state of emergency, the Knesset is unable to conduct legislative proceedings. In this case, however, the Knesset was active.
Violence and threats against the Supreme Court. In recent weeks, there has been an increase in threats against the Supreme Court. In early June, a day after a demonstration held in front of the Supreme Court aimed against the judicial system, a shattered window was found in the building as a result of a shot from a non-lethal weapon. In addition, during two Supreme Court hearings, disorder broke out in the courtroom, with the participation of serving Knesset members. The president of the Supreme Court emphasized that this was an attempt to thwart a legal process, harming the foundations of democracy.
In addition, coalition members (including the Ministers of Communications and Education) have continued to call for non-compliance with judicial orders.
A bill to reduce the salaries of judges. In May, the Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a bill to cut the salaries of Supreme Court justices and senior judicial officials, while raising the salaries of Knesset members. Beyond that, the bill proposes the cancelation of the unique protections set out in the Basic Law: The Judiciary, thereby allowing the adoption of “decisions solely intended to reduce the salary of judges.” This proposal could serve as a mechanism for exerting political pressure on judges.Proposed Basic Law: Salaries of Officers in Government Authorities (Legislative Amendments), P/5532/25.
Politicization of the Public Committee on Party Financing. In July, a new composition was announced for the Public Committee on Party Financing, whose role is to determine the funding units distributed to political parties. Alongside the Committee chair (the former president of the Tel Aviv District Court), the Speaker of the Knesset appointed two members who are currently active in the Likud party and who lack appropriate academic qualifications.Notice regarding the composition of the public committee under the Party Funding Law, YP 5785 8252. This raises concerns about politicization of the Committee’s decisions, mainly due to the fact that decisions to increase the party funding allocations can be made by majority opinion (and do not require a unanimous decision).Assaf Shapira and Moran Kandelshtein-Haina, “Opinion: An expensive Knesset—On politicization of the Public Committee on Party Financing” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 17, 2025).
An unsuccessful attempt to remove MK Ayman Odeh from Knesset (Hadash-Ta’al, an opposition party representing the Arab public in Israel). The Attorney General’s office and the legal advisor to the Knesset strongly objected to the impeachment process, and made clear that it was doubtful that Odeh’s remarks met the threshold set in case law, which requires a significant mass of clear and convincing evidence of support for armed struggle by a terrorist organization.
73 MKs voted in favor of the impeachment, but the special majority of 90 MKs required by law was not reached. However, the way the Knesset House Committee conducted itself during the impeachment hearing demonstrated the difficulties inherent in the process, in which Knesset members dismiss a fellow member—an unusual procedure from a comparative perspective.Amir Fuchs, Avital Friedman and Lital Feller, “Review—The Impeachment Law: Israel, the world, and the impeachment process of Ayman Odeh” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 11, 2025); Knesset House Committee, “Committee News: The Knesset House Committee began today to discuss the request to terminate the term of office of MK Ayman Odeh” (June 24, 2025); Knesset House Committee, “Committee News: At the end of a stormy debate that began last week and continues today, the Knesset House Committee accepted MK Avichai Boaron’s request to recommend to the Knesset plenum to terminate the term of office of MK Ayman Odeh” (June 30, 2025).
Personal legislation against politicians who are veterans of the security establishment. The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a bill to revoke benefits to former senior security officials if the political echelon determines that they have encouraged refusal to serve or volunteer the IDF, called for people to end their support for Israel, or supported the imposition of sanctions on Israel.Draft Law on the Withdrawal of Benefits from Senior Defense Officials, 5785-2025, P/5831/25. One of the bill’s authors confirmed the personal nature of the bill when he stated that it was directed at certain political opponents who were veterans of the security establishment.
The Minister of National Security’s continued intervention in police activities. In April, it was agreed between the Attorney General and the Minister of National Security that the minister would not engage in issues relating to protests against the government; would not interfere in operative decisions of the police or in investigations; and that his powers to intervene in police appointments were greatly limited.Tova Zimuki, “The Ben Gvir-attorney general plan: The minister will be restricted in making appointments, and will not intervene operationally in demonstrations” (Ynet, April 29, 2025); Suzie Navot and Mirit Lavi, “The attorney general-Ben-Gvir framework is a creative ‘middle-ground’ solution” (Israel Democracy Institute, May 13, 2025). A short time later, the Attorney General warned that the minister was violating the agreement. Among other infractions, he refused to approve the promotion of a female officer who was involved in investigating the Prime Minister’s cases. The Attorney General warned that this action could lead to the obstruction of justice, and also constituted a blatant violation of the obligations the minister had given the Supreme Court.
Procedures for the appointment of the Civil Service Commissioner. In May, the HCJ ruled, by majority opinion, that the appointment of the civil service commissioner requires a competitive process.HCJ 37830-08-24, Louis Brandeis Institute for Society, Economy and Democracy v. Government of Israel (May 12, 2025). Two days later, the Prime Minister appointed a temporary commissioner, in defiance of the Attorney General’s office, which argued that the statutory consultation process had not been completed.
Later, the Prime Minister announced the temporary appointment of Daniel Hershkovitz, who served as commissioner until recently. The HCJ ordered an further hearing on its initial ruling.
A bill aimed at eliminating the requirement for a competitive process in the appointment of the civil service commissioner. In May, the Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a bill that would allow the prime minister to directly appoint a temporary civil service commissioner.Civil Service (Appointments) Bill (Amendment—Appointment of a Commissioner and Imposition of a Temporary Position), 5785-2025, P/5838/25.
Continued failure to appoint women to ministerial director general positions, in violation of the HCJ’s ruling. In February 2025, the HCJ ruled that the government was violating the law by not having a single female director general serving in any government ministry, and ordered the government to formulate rules to ensure adequate representation of women in director general positions within six months. Despite this, five months after the ruling, no female director general had been permanently appointed to a government ministry, while seven male directors general were appointed.Anat Thon Ashkenazy, “The Ministry of Social Equality will also be headed by a man” (Israel Democracy Institute, May 11, 2025); Assaf Shapira, Daphna Aviram-Nitzan, and Nisreen Abo Asalh, “Review: A gender analysis of directors general of government ministries, 2003–2025” (Israel Democracy Institute, July 2, 2025).
Advancing a bill to politicize the Police Internal Investigations Department (PIID). A bill under discussion in Knesset committees seeks to remove the PIID from the State Attorney’s Office and subordinate it directly to the minister of justice and their director general. The bill also seeks to authorize the PIID to investigate offenses committed by prosecutors from the State Attorney’s Office. This proposal, if approved, would undermine the independence of the PIID and could deter it from investigating cases of government corruption and police violence, especially against protesters.Mordechai Kremnitzer, Guy Lurie, and Amir Fuchs, “Opinion: Subordinating the PIID to the minister of justice will harm its independence, the independence of the State Attorney’s Office, and the rule of law” (Israel Democracy Institute, March 12, 2023).
Bills to politicize the most senior positions in the civil service. The first bill would allow a new government, during its first 100 days, to dismiss the most senior officials in the civil service: the Attorney General, the heads of the security and law enforcement agencies, and others.Proposed Law on Termination of Tenure of Senior Officers during the Initial Term of a New Government, 5785-2025, P/5733/25. According to the second bill, the requirement to consult with the Civil Service Senior Appointments Advisory Committee would be canceled, allowing the government to approve senior appointments without independent oversight.Civil Service (Appointments) Bill (Amendment—Method of Appointment), 5785-2025.
A bill to politicize government companies. The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a bill that would cancel the restriction on the appointment of political cronies to the boards of directors of government companies. This is a particularly significant step given the central role of such companies in the Israeli economy, with around 70 companies that have key roles in the fields of defense, energy, water, transportation, and more.For more on government companies, see: Assaf Shapira and Edna Harel Fisher, “Review: Minister Amsalem vs. the Government Companies Authority: Neither the public good nor governance” (Israel Democracy Institute, March 23, 2023).
Extending the Law for the Prevention of Harm to State Security by a Foreign Broadcasting Entity. The Knesset extended the law’s validity by six months, via an expedited legislative process of only one week. This law was originally enacted for a period of just four months, and a petition against it is pending before the HCJ. Critics argue that the law disproportionately violates freedom of the press, and does not serve security needs.HCJ 2859/24, Association for Civil Rights in Israel v. The Prime Minister. In addition, the National Security Committee is discussing a proposal to make the existing law more stringent.
A bill to amend the Counter-Terrorism Law which restricts freedom of expression. The Knesset Constitution Committee discussed a bill that would authorize the police to launch an investigation into suspected incitement to terrorism without prior approval by the state attorney.Counter-Terrorism Bill (Amendment No. 11) (Offense of Incitement to Terrorism), 5784-2024; Amir Fuchs and Mordechai Kremnitzer, “Opinion: Granting the police powers to launch investigations on incitement to terrorism without the approval of the State Attorney’s Office will open a window to false investigations and arrests” (Israel Democracy Institute, June 9, 2025). The Israel Police itself expressed reservations about the bill during the Knesset debate. This amendment, if passed, could lead to arbitrary arrests and investigations aimed at intimidating those who want to criticize the government or express themselves in any other way that is not to the liking of the police.
Bills targeting the Public Broadcasting Corporation. In June, the Knesset tabled for second and third readings a bill that would institute an annual public hearing for the chair of the Public Broadcasting Corporation Council in the Knesset’s Economic Affairs Committee.Israel Public Broadcasting Bill (Amendment No. 10 and Temporary Order), 5785-2025, P/3776/25. Another bill was also approved to close the Corporation’s news division and privatize its Reshet Bet radio station.Proposed Law to Change the Format of Public Broadcasting and to Regulate National Radio Broadcasting (Legislative Amendments), 5785-2025, P/5585/25. These initiatives are part of a series of attempts to deter the public broadcasting corporation and undermine its independence.
A bill for government intervention in the television advertising market. The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a bill that would require companies to advertise on Channel 14 – which is affiliated with the ruling party – thereby increasing the channel’s revenues. The Attorney General warned that the bill could increase political influence over media outlets.
Broadcasting market reform. The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved a draft memorandum of law that includes a sweeping reform to change the face of the broadcasting market. The memorandum is being advanced without a professional discussion being concluded, and it lacks mechanisms to ensure the separation between the commercial channels and the News Company, which could cause real harm to the free broadcasting of news.Letter from Deputy Attorney General (Economic Law) Adv. Meir Levin to Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice MK Yariv Levin, titled “The Draft Communications Law (Broadcasting), 5785-2025” (May 18, 2025). So far, the bill has not been tabled for reading in the Knesset.
Summoning journalists for questioning. The Israel Police announced that Channel 13’s legal correspondent, Aviad Glickman, had been summoned for questioning under caution, and according to media reports, political pressure was applied on police officers to open an investigation. The Attorney General instructed the police to consult with the State Attorney’s Office before opening an investigation.
At the same time, in a highly unusual step, journalist Israel Frey was detained under conditions reserved for security prisoners. The designation of a journalist as a security prisoner for publishing harsh remarks raises concerns about the deterrent use of criminal tools against journalists.See letter from MK Meirav Ben-Ari, MK Gilad Kariv, and MK Naor Shiri to the Israel Prison Service legal advisor, Eran Nahon, the Israel Police legal advisor, Elazar Kahane, and the state attorney, Adv. Amit Isman, titled “The classification of Israel Frey as a security prisoner” (July 10, 2025). In addition, the editor of the Jerusalem Post was interrogated under caution and detained, in a manner that could harm the freedom of the press.
Violating creative freedoms through changes to the Israel Prize regulations. The Minister of Education announced his intention to amend the Israel Prize regulations so that it would not be possible to award the prize “to those who acted on their own initiative against IDF soldiers or the State of Israel,” including via complaints, petitions, systematic legal representation, or fundraising. This change, if implemented, could lead to the exclusion of cultural figures who criticize the government.HCJ 8076/21, The Committee of Judges for the Awarding of the Israel Prize for the Year 2020–2021 in the Field of Computer Science Research v. Minister of Education (March 29, 2022). See also: HCJ 2199/21, The Committee of Judges for the Awarding of the Israel Prize for the Year 2020–2021 in the Field of Mathematics Research, Computer Science Research v. Minister of Education (August 12, 2021).
Advancing a bill to provide a legal basis for gender segregation in academia. The Knesset passed the first reading of a bill that greatly expands the permissible conditions for separation between women and men in institutions of higher education “for religious reasons.”Student Rights Bill (Amendment No. 10) (Separate Tracks of Study in Graduate Programs), 5785-2025. This bill, if approved, would violate the basic right to equality and the quality of academic studies, because they would be held under restrictions and prohibitions.
Steps to withdraw funding from universities due to political content on campuses. The Minister of Education sought to cut state funding to the Hebrew University and Tel Aviv University, claiming that they hosted Nakba events, even though the universities made it clear that they did not fund the events in question. This constitutes an attempt to exert political-budgetary pressure on academic institutions and to label them as problematic arenas, without any basis.
Advancing a bill for the taxation of civil society organizations (“the NGO Law”). In preparation for the first reading of the bill, an updated version was tabled, according to which a 23% tax will be imposed on donations from foreign state entities, unless the reporting NGO commits not to engage in certain activities, including criticizing the government or promoting activity in the Knesset. The practical consequence would be that NGOs will be forced to refrain from legitimate democratic activities in order to gain exemption from this tax.
Violating the right to demonstrate under the cover of the state of emergency. There were reports of cases in which the police used excessive force in preventing demonstrations during the Iran war, including the arrest of demonstrators. In some cases, women who were demonstrating against the war and in favor of the release of the hostages were even subjected to strip searches.
Limiting freedom of movement by prohibiting travel abroad. During the war with Iran, Israeli citizens were prohibited from leaving the country by air, with only tourists and diplomats allowed to fly. This step violated the constitutional right to leave the country and was imposed without being given explicit basis in legislation.Amichai Cohen and Mirit Lavi, “Explainer: Operation Rising Lion—A special situation on the home front” (Israel Democracy Institute, June 19, 2025).
Violating the freedom of the press under the cover of the state of emergency. The Chief Military Censor issued an order requiring media outlets to submit for approval any publication regarding the locations of missile strikes. The order—which was drafted without consulting the Attorney General’s Ofice and without being published as required by law—served as the basis for actions against journalists, including confiscation of equipment and even arrests. The Minister of Communications and the Minister of National Security argued, based on this order, that foreign media outlets are obligated to obtain prior approval for any broadcast from Israel during the fighting—both for actually broadcasting and for the broadcast location. This argument has no basis in the order published by the military censor.
During the summer session of the Knesset, the coalition and the government accelerated steps to change Israel’s democratic character. Over this period, there was a significant escalation in attempts to take over the country’s senior gatekeepers – first and foremost, the attempt to dismiss the Attorney General. The impeachment process was carried out in a problematic manner that violates the rule of law and in the absence of any justified grounds. Alongside this, steps have been taken in the Knesset in recent months that undermine the rule of law, the separation of powers, the independence of the judicial system, and basic rights.
Admittedly, the legislative process of some of these bills was not completed in the summer session. However, if they continue and eventually pass into law, in their current form, they have significant potential to change the face of Israeli democracy.
- Tags:
- Governance,
- Government,
- Rule of Law,
- The Judicial Selection Committee,
- Legislation,
- Regulation of the Media,
- The Renewed Judicial Overhaul,
- democracy,
- judicial reform,
- judicial issues,
- Supreme Court,
- Democratic Values and Institutions Program,
- Center for Democratic Values and Institutions