Not Really Interested in Reform

Israel’s State Prosecution is a mess.  For years it has been incapable of keeping up with its workload; a few years ago the organization shredded over 30,000 files of cases it acknowledged it would never get around to investigating.  Its work is often sloppy, prompting harsh criticism from judges and violating the  due-process rights of defendants.  Its workers are demoralized, as reflected by a lengthy strike last year over pay rates.  It is infected with political bias.  A special unit, the “Office of the Deputy Attorney General for Special Affairs,” focuses on prosecuting people for what they write and say, as well as for demonstrating.  There are laws in Israel that can be interpreted in a way that prohibits these fundamental democratic activities, and the “Office” applies these laws selectively, generally against right-wing and religious political activists.

Widespread complaints against the State Prosecution have led to calls for some kind of oversight body with the power to redress the Prosecution’s violation of citizens’ civil and due-process rights.  Pressure for this reform grew to the point where the current Attorney General, Yehoshua Weinstein, admitted that something would probably have to be done.

Weinstein finally announced the establishment of a committee to consider how such an oversight body should be designed.  The composition of the committee is not encouraging.  All eight members are senior employees of the Justice Department.  They include Mike Blass, a deputy Attorney General with notorious left-wing views, and Raz Nizri, a senior aide to Weinstein (Nizri served the previous Attorney General, Menahem Mazuz, in the same capacity).  

The point is not so much the political bias of the committee—Nizri is simply a lapdog for whoever holds the office of Attorney General—as the fact that these are all insiders whose first concern is to protect the institutional interests of the State Prosecution.  Don’t look to them for any fundamental reforms. 

Weinstein’s decision represents a pattern.  A generation ago complaints about police violence led to the establishment of a special unit within the Ministry of Justice to investigate errant policemen.  A study by the State Ombudsman seven years ago found that this body was chiefly staffed by . . . policemen, seconded to the unit for a number of years before returning to the police.  Many had themselves long records of complaints filed against them by citizens who alleged their rights had been violated.  Needless to say this body, the Police Investigation Department, is not considered very effective.

In 2006, rising complaints against judges prompted the Knesset to pass legislation to create an ombudsman for the court system.  The judges fought tooth and nail and lobbied the Knesset to change the legislation to provide that the ombudsman be a retired judge, appointed by the Chief Justice.  So lobbied, so provided.

So in Israel, “oversight” of the legal and law-enforcement system means oversight by  the system:  Judges by a judge, policemen by policemen, and now if Weinstein has his way, prosecutors by prosecutors.  Which is to say, no effective oversight after all.

What really needs to be done is to establish a completely separate unit within the State Ombudsman’s office, charged with overseeing the protection of citizens’ civil rights.  This unit should have the authority to investigate complaints against judges, prosecutors and policemen, to launch disciplinary actions against them and if necessary to indict them for violations of the law.

Weinstein’s announcement produced protests by members of the Knesset Committee on State Oversight, which had scheduled a session on the issue.  The MKs insisted that the committee Weinstein established to prepare proposals for oversight of the State Prosecution include representatives from academia and the private sector.  Stay tuned.