Hubbry Logo
Ministry of Justice (Israel)Ministry of Justice (Israel)Main
Open search
Ministry of Justice (Israel)
Community hub
Ministry of Justice (Israel)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Ministry of Justice (Israel)
Ministry of Justice (Israel)
Ministry of Justice (Israel)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Ministry of Justice
משרד המשפטים
Agency overview
Formed1948
JurisdictionGovernment of Israel
Minister responsible
Agency executive
Websitewww.justice.gov.il
Ministry of Justice building in Givat Ram in 2024
Judicial swearing-in ceremony in 2015

The Ministry of Justice (Hebrew: מִשְׂרָד הַמִשְׁפָּטִים, Misrad HaMishpatim; Arabic: وزارة العدل) is the Israeli government ministry that oversees the Israeli judicial system.

History

[edit]

The office was established with the establishment of the Provisional Government in 1948. The first minister who headed it was Pinchas Rosen, and at the beginning of his career he had only three employees. The first goal of the office was to create continuity in the activity of the essential legal institutions during the transition period from British rule. In particular, there was a need to fill the positions of judges in the courts, as the British and Arab judges left. The appointment of the first judges of the Supreme Court in its incarnation as an Israeli court was approved by the Provisional Government and the Provisional Council of State in July of that year. In 1948, the Office of the General Custodian was also staffed.

Another goal that stood before the eyes of the heads of the ministry in the early years of the State of Israel was the formation of Israeli laws that would replace the Ottoman and Mandatory legal systems. However, the connection to British law was severed only in 1980, with the enactment of the Law on the Foundations of Law, which repealed a section of the King's Word in the Council on the Land of Israel that stated that where provisions were not established in the local law, the courts would rule according to common law and the laws of honesty. Also, even nowadays, more than 70 years after the establishment of the State of Israel, laws enacted by the mandatory legislature or new versions of such laws (such as the Torts Ordinance, the Evidence Ordinance or the Municipalities Ordinance) remain in force. The last piece of Ottoman legislation, the Majela, was abolished in 1984.

In 1949 the office consisted of three main departments: consulting, legislation and advocacy. The office also included the administrative departments: land registrar, general guardian and general registrar.[1] 506 employees worked in the office. In April 1949, the prosecutor's office and the general registrar moved to Jerusalem.[2]

Structure

[edit]
  • The Office of the State Attorney
  • Israel Money Laundering and Terror Financing Prohibition Authority
  • Freedom Of Information Unit
  • Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities
  • The Population and migration Tribunals
  • Israeli Corporations Authority
  • Public Information Unit (Freedom of Information)
  • Department of Policy Planning and Strategy
  • Land Registry and Settlement of Rights
  • Legal Aid
  • Privacy Protection Council
  • The Internal Audit Regulatory Unit
  • The Guardian General and Director of Inheritance Affairs
  • The Anti-Racism Coordinating Government Unit
  • The Commissioner of Business Service Providers
  • The Inspector for Complaints Against the Israel Security Agency (ISA) Interrogators
  • The Ombudsman of the State Representatives in the Courts
  • The Regulation of Professions Division
  • Public Defense
  • The Real Estate Valuation Division (The Government Appraiser)
  • The Sharia Courts
  • Ombudsman of the Israeli Judiciary
  • Israel Patent Office
  • Foreign Relations Unit
  • Finance Department
  • Digital Technologies & Information
  • Internal Auditing[3]

Office of the State Attorney

[edit]

The Office of the State Attorney constitutes a part of the law enforcement system, representating the State before the courts. The Office of the State Attorney is headed by the State Attorney and is subject to the Attorney General's directives. The State Attorney has four deputies: Criminal Matters Deputy, Civil Matters Deputy, Economic Enforcement Deputy and Special Matters Deputy.[4]

List of ministers

[edit]

The Minister of Justice (Hebrew: שַׂר הַמִשְׁפָּטִים, Sar HaMishpatim) is the political head of the ministry. Unlike other ministries, there has never been a Deputy Minister.

# Minister Party Government Term start Term end Notes
1 Pinchas Rosen Progressive Party P, 1, 2 14 May 1948 8 October 1951
2 Dov Yosef Mapai 3 8 October 1951 25 June 1952
3 Haim Cohn Not an MK 3 25 June 1952 24 December 1952
– Pinchas Rosen Progressive Party 4, 5, 6, 7 24 December 1952 13 February 1956
4 David Ben-Gurion Mapai 7 13 February 1956 28 February 1956 Serving Prime Minister
– Pinchas Rosen Progressive Party, Liberal Party 7, 8, 9 28 February 1956 2 November 1961
– Dov Yosef Mapai 10, 11, 12 2 November 1961 12 January 1966
5 Ya'akov Shimshon Shapira Mapai 13, 14, 15 12 January 1966 13 June 1972
– Ya'akov Shimshon Shapira Mapai 15 12 September 1972 1 November 1973
6 Haim Yosef Zadok Alignment 16, 17 10 March 1974 20 June 1977
7 Menachem Begin Likud 18 20 June 1977 24 October 1977 Serving Prime Minister
8 Shmuel Tamir Democratic Movement for Change 18 20 June 1977 5 August 1980
9 Moshe Nissim Likud 18, 19, 20, 21 13 August 1980 16 April 1986
10 Yitzhak Moda'i Likud 21 16 April 1986 23 July 1986
11 Avraham Sharir Likud 21, 22 30 July 1986 22 December 1988
12 Dan Meridor Likud 23, 24 22 December 1988 13 July 1992
13 David Libai Labor 25, 26 13 July 1992 18 June 1996
14 Yaakov Neeman Not an MK 27 18 June 1996 10 August 1996
15 Benjamin Netanyahu Likud 27 18 June 1996 4 September 1996 Serving Prime Minister
16 Tzachi Hanegbi Likud 27 4 September 1996 6 July 1999
17 Yossi Beilin One Israel 28 6 July 1999 7 March 2001
18 Meir Sheetrit Likud 29 7 March 2001 28 February 2003
19 Tommy Lapid Shinui 30 28 February 2003 4 December 2004
20 Tzipi Livni Likud, Kadima 30 5 December 2004 4 May 2006
21 Haim Ramon Kadima 31 4 May 2006 22 August 2006
– Meir Sheetrit Kadima 31 23 August 2006 29 November 2006 acting
– Tzipi Livni Kadima 31 29 November 2006 7 February 2007
22 Daniel Friedmann Not an MK 31 7 February 2007 31 March 2009
– Yaakov Neeman Not an MK 32 31 March 2009 18 March 2013
– Tzipi Livni Hatnuah 33 18 March 2013 4 December 2014
23 Ayelet Shaked The Jewish Home, New Right 34 14 May 2015 2 June 2019
24 Amir Ohana Likud 34 5 June 2019 17 May 2020
25 Avi Nissenkorn Israel Resilience Party, Blue and White 35 17 May 2020 1 January 2021
– Benny Gantz Israel Resilience Party, Blue and White 35 1 January 2021 1 April 2021 acting
26 Benny Gantz Israel Resilience Party, Blue and White 35 28 April 2021 13 June 2021
27 Gideon Sa'ar New Hope 36 13 June 2021 29 December 2022
28 Yariv Levin Likud 37 29 December 2022

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Ministry of Justice (Israel)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Ministry of Justice of is the ministry responsible for formulating and executing policies related to , including drafting , providing legal counsel to the , overseeing public prosecutions, and administering aspects of the judicial system such as court administration and legal services. Established in upon the declaration of 's , the ministry inherited and adapted the legal framework from the British Mandate period to support the new state's amid challenges like the exodus of prior judicial personnel. Headed by Minister as of October 2025, the ministry operates from and coordinates with independent courts while handling probation services, notarial affairs, and enforcement of civil judgments through regional directorates. Its core functions emphasize rendering justice to the public, though administrative oversight of judges ended in 1953 to enhance . The ministry has been pivotal in legislative processes and legal reforms but has faced significant controversies, particularly under recent leadership, including efforts to restructure judicial appointment mechanisms and limit the Supreme Court's override of laws, sparking nationwide protests over perceived threats to democratic checks and balances. These initiatives, defended by proponents as correcting judicial overreach by unelected officials, highlight ongoing tensions between the executive-legislative branches and the in Israel's system lacking a formal .

History

Establishment and Foundational Role (1948–1967)

The Ministry of Justice was formed as part of Israel's immediately following the Declaration of Independence on May 14, 1948, amid the onset of the War of Independence. , a German-born Zionist leader and signatory to the Declaration, was appointed the inaugural Minister of Justice, initially operating with minimal staff to address urgent legal needs in the nascent state. The framework, established by the People's Council transitioning into the Provisional State Council, tasked the Ministry with adapting the inherited British Mandate legal order—including Ottoman-era civil laws and emergency regulations—to Israel's sovereign requirements, as no comprehensive existed at inception. In its early role, the Ministry prioritized judicial continuity and reform, advising Ben-Gurion's cabinet on legal interpretations during wartime exigencies and facilitating the appointment of the first justices in late 1948, led by Moshe Smoira. By 1949, following the first elections, the Ministry oversaw the formalization of courts through ordinances that preserved judicial independence while integrating Jewish legal traditions selectively, rejecting wholesale adoption of in favor of a mixed common-Continental system to ensure state stability and minority rights under the Declaration's equality pledge. Rosen's tenure emphasized legislative drafting for foundational statutes, such as those governing land tenure and citizenship, amid mass absorbing over 700,000 Jews by 1951, which strained administrative capacity. From 1951 to 1967, succeeding ministers including Ya'akov Shimshon Shapira continued building the Ministry's infrastructure, enacting key laws like the 1957 Courts Law to structure a hierarchical and the 1963 Penal Law to consolidate criminal codes, addressing gaps in Mandate-era fragmentation. The period encompassed responses to security threats, including the 1956 Sinai Campaign, where the Ministry coordinated legal support for military tribunals and property regulations in contested areas, while resisting politicization of the to maintain rule-of-law principles amid socialist-leaning . By 1967, the Ministry had expanded to handle prosecutions, services, and international legal , laying groundwork for Israel's hybrid legal identity blending pragmatism with democratic safeguards, though critiques from religious factions highlighted tensions over secular dominance in lawmaking. Following the of 1967, the Ministry of Justice assumed expanded responsibilities for legal advisory services and legislative drafting related to the administration of captured territories, contributing to internal growth in its consulting and legislation departments to handle complex international and domestic legal challenges. In 1968, the Knesset enacted the State Commissions of Inquiry Law under the ministry's auspices, authorizing the establishment of independent panels to probe matters of public importance, such as security incidents and governmental operations, thereby institutionalizing a mechanism for accountability and policy review. A major focus was the systematic codification of fragmented laws inherited from Ottoman, British Mandate, and ad hoc post-independence enactments. The ministry's legislative department, led by figures like Uri Yadin in the 1960s and 1970s, drafted statutes modernizing core areas; notable examples include the Sale (Specific Performance) Law of 1968 and the Contracts (General Part) Law of 1973, which established foundational principles for contract formation, interpretation, and remedies, drawing on comparative analyses including Jewish legal sources. This "codification by installments" approach yielded over twenty statutes by the early 1980s, replacing reliance on English under the repealed 1922 . Criminal law underwent comprehensive reform with the Penal Law of 1977 (effective 1978), consolidating offenses, penalties, and procedures into a unified code that emphasized proportionality and rehabilitation over prior patchwork regulations, while incorporating defenses like necessity and duress. The Foundations of Law Statute of 1980 further directed courts, in the absence of statute or precedent, to derive rules from "the heritage of " including Jewish law, , and justice-equity principles, signaling a cultural reorientation amid debates over secular versus religious influences. In the 1980s, the ministry advanced toward a unified civil code by appointing a Codification Commission, which produced a draft Compilation of Civil Law Bill in 1980 empowering the Minister of Justice to consolidate existing laws into thematic divisions like obligations, property, and torts; though not fully adopted due to legislative resistance, it spurred enactments such as the Standard Contracts Law of 1982 regulating adhesion contracts to protect consumers. Paralleling these efforts, the Basic Law: The Judiciary (1984) and Judiciary Law (1984) formalized the court hierarchy—magistrates', district, and Supreme Court—while vesting the Minister of Justice with regulatory authority over court operations, budgets, and personnel, marking a shift of administrative control from judicial independence toward executive oversight to address rising caseloads from population growth (from approximately 2.8 million in 1968 to 4.5 million by 1990) and economic expansion. This integration enhanced institutional efficiency but raised concerns over potential politicization of judicial administration.

Contemporary Challenges and Adaptations (2000s–Present)

In the 2000s, the Ministry of Justice grappled with surging caseloads in the courts, exacerbated by the Second Intifada's wave of security-related litigation and administrative detentions, which strained judicial resources and contributed to persistent backlogs. By the 2010s, Israel faced a chronic shortage of judges—fewer than 800 handling approximately one million cases annually—leading to delays in civil, criminal, and family court proceedings, with studies indicating that additional judicial appointments paradoxically reduced overall productivity per judge due to redistributed workloads. The Ministry responded by advocating for recruitment drives and procedural efficiencies, though implementation lagged amid budgetary constraints and recruitment difficulties. Prison overcrowding emerged as another enduring operational challenge, with facilities operating at over 120% capacity by the mid-2000s, prompting special legislation for administrative prisoner releases to avert humanitarian crises. rulings repeatedly intervened, such as in 2010s decisions mandating minimum living space per inmate and deeming conditions unacceptable, forcing the Ministry to prioritize expansion, including new constructions announced in as the primary solution. Post-October 7, 2023, the influx of thousands of security detainees intensified pressures, with the reporting crisis-level degradation in conditions by 2023, though the Ministry maintained that targeted releases and facility upgrades mitigated risks without compromising security. A pivotal adaptation effort centered on structural reforms to address perceived judicial overreach in Israel's framework, lacking a formal . In January 2023, Justice Minister , under the Ministry's auspices, proposed overhauling the Judicial Selection Committee to shift appointment powers toward elected officials, introducing a legislative override mechanism, and abolishing the Supreme Court's "" for reviewing government actions—measures framed as restoring democratic balance against an unelected judiciary's expansive interventions. The passed the reasonableness limitation in July 2023, but the invalidated it in January 2024 by an 8-7 margin, citing threats to ; renewed pushes in 2025 targeted selection reforms amid ongoing debates over the Ministry's role in balancing executive accountability with electoral legitimacy. To enhance efficiency, the Ministry has pursued technological adaptations, including pilots for AI-assisted case management to triage backlogs and reduce judicial time on routine tasks, as outlined in 2023-2025 policy discussions recognizing digital tools' potential to handle Israel's high-volume dockets without expanding personnel indefinitely. These initiatives, alongside international legal defenses against ICC probes into military operations, reflect the Ministry's shift toward data-driven and resilient frameworks amid geopolitical strains.

Organizational Structure

Leadership and Central Administration

The Ministry of Justice is led by the Minister of Justice as its political head, responsible for setting policy and representing the ministry in the cabinet, alongside the as the senior civil servant overseeing administrative operations and implementation. The current Minister is , serving since December 2022 as part of the thirty-seventh government. The , Itamar Donenfeld, has held the position since January 8, 2023, and reports directly to the Minister while managing the ministry's divisions, including those for , courts, prisons, and services. Central administration falls under the Director General's office, which coordinates budgeting, personnel, inter-divisional activities, and high-level appointments such as participation in committees for selecting the Attorney General and state attorneys. This office ensures operational efficiency across the ministry's approximately 7,000 employees and supports the Minister in executing government legal priorities. Key positions within the Director General's office include:
  • Chief of Staff: Adv. Yoni Kirvani, handling day-to-day coordination and advisory functions.
  • Advisors: Adv. Tziyon Lifshitz-Plus and Adv. Refael Dayan, providing specialized legal and strategic input.
  • Bureau Coordinators: Renana Betzalel and Tal Dagan, managing administrative and logistical support.
These roles facilitate the ministry's core administrative duties, such as and compliance with government directives, while maintaining professional independence from political oversight in routine operations.

Key Divisions and Subordinate Agencies

The Israeli Ministry of Justice operates through a hierarchical structure led by the Minister of Justice, encompassing central administrative units, professional directorates, and independent subordinate agencies responsible for judicial administration, legal , and specialized regulatory functions. Key subordinate agencies include the Courts Administration, which oversees the day-to-day operations of Israel's civil, , , and supreme courts, managing budgets exceeding NIS 1.7 billion annually, judicial appointments logistics, case management systems, and infrastructure for over 700 judges and thousands of staff across 28 locations. The Enforcement and Collection Authority functions as an autonomous body handling , execution of orders, and proceedings, processing approximately 1.2 million active files as of 2023 and employing over 1,500 officers nationwide to ensure compliance with civil judgments. Under the Attorney General, who serves as the government's chief legal advisor, the Office of the State Attorney manages civil and criminal prosecutions through six district offices (Northern, , Central, , , Southern) and specialized departments for high courts, economic crimes, fiscal matters, and , representing the state in over 90% of criminal indictments filed annually. The Legal Counsel and Legislative Affairs Department drafts government bills, reviews proposed legislation for constitutionality, and provides advisory opinions on , with subunits focused on , , and international agreements, contributing to the preparation of roughly 200 primary laws per term. Additional key divisions under the Director General include the Policy Planning and Strategy Division, established in 2014 to coordinate long-term legal policy reforms and inter-ministerial initiatives; the Regulation of Professions Division, which licenses and regulates fields like , , and , issuing over 50,000 professional licenses yearly; and the Israel Corporations Authority, responsible for company registrations, annual reporting, and oversight for more than 600,000 active entities. Business-oriented agencies encompass the Land Registry and Settlement of Rights Authority, maintaining records for 's 7 million land parcels and processing 150,000 transactions annually; the , granting rights with 10,000 applications reviewed each year; and the Money Laundering and Terror Financing Prohibition Authority, enforcing compliance under the 2016 Prohibition Law through audits of financial institutions and reporting of 20,000 suspicious transactions per year. Social and protective units include the Privacy Protection Authority, implementing data protection regulations under the 1981 Privacy Protection Law and handling 5,000 complaints annually; the Commission for Equal Rights of Persons with Disabilities, advocating policy changes and monitoring accessibility compliance; and the National Anti-Trafficking Coordinator, coordinating multi-agency efforts that led to 100 convictions in cases from 2018 to 2023. Legal support divisions provide public defense services, representing indigent defendants in 40,000 cases yearly, and for civil matters affecting low-income populations, funded at NIS 200 million in 2023 budgets. Administrative backbone divisions, such as , , and Digital Technologies, support operations with IT infrastructure serving 8,000 ministry employees and digitized case management systems reducing processing times by 30% since 2020 implementations.

Functions and Responsibilities

The Legislation and Legal Counseling Department within Israel's serves as the primary entity for drafting government-initiated bills, ensuring they align with legal standards and policy objectives approved by the cabinet. This department, supported by teams headed by the Attorney General, collaborates with relevant ministries to translate policy decisions into precise legislative language, including the preparation of explanatory notes and legal memoranda. Once drafted, bills are submitted by the Minister of Justice to the cabinet for approval before advancing to the , where the department monitors parliamentary progress to facilitate passage while addressing amendments or procedural hurdles. In addition to proactive drafting, the department provides comprehensive legal guidance to government bodies, offering opinions on the implications of proposed private members' bills introduced in the . It evaluates these bills for consistency with existing laws, potential conflicts, and fiscal or administrative impacts, subsequently recommending positions to the Minister of Justice, who may oppose or support them on behalf of the government. This vetting process helps prevent legislative fragmentation and ensures governmental coherence, with the Attorney General's assessments carrying binding weight in contentious cases. The ministry's legal support extends to ongoing advisory services for the Prime Minister's Office, cabinet, and individual ministries through the Legal Advice Division, which delivers expert opinions on policy implementation, contractual matters, and civil proceedings to uphold rule-of-law principles. Ministry-embedded legal advisors act as gatekeepers, integrating legal compliance into policy execution while escalating disputes to the Attorney General for resolution, thereby balancing executive priorities with judicial oversight. This framework, rooted in the ministry's constitutional role, has evolved to handle increasing legislative volume, with the department processing hundreds of bills annually amid debates over advisor independence.

Judicial and Courts Administration

The Courts Administration, a distinct unit within Israel's , manages the non-adjudicative operations of the judicial system to support efficient court functioning while preserving in decision-making. Established under the Courts Law (Consolidated Version), 1984, it handles administrative matters across all court levels, including magistrate courts, district courts, and the , without authority over judges' rulings or appointments. The Minister of Justice bears ultimate responsibility for the courts system, with the administration implementing policies aligned with executive oversight. Leadership falls to the Director of Courts, a serving appointed by the Minister of Justice with approval from the Supreme Court President and district court presidents, as stipulated in Section 82 of the Courts Law. The Director reports to the Minister on administrative implementation, including resource allocation and operational protocols, though day-to-day practices emphasize autonomy to avoid executive influence on judicial processes. This structure reflects historical tensions between administrative centralization under the executive and demands for judicial , dating back to the system's post-1948 formation when courts inherited British Mandate frameworks with limited initial resources. Core functions encompass budgeting, personnel management for non-judicial staff (such as clerks and administrative personnel), maintenance of court facilities, deployment of systems for case tracking and electronic filing, scheduling of hearings, and compilation of judicial statistics. In 2022, the judicial system's implemented budget totaled €816,021,581 (approximately NIS 3.1 billion at prevailing exchange rates), equating to €84.5 per capita, funding operations amid rising caseloads. By September 2023, the Director highlighted an "unparalleled" global case burden, with the 2023 state budget allocating funds for 11 additional judicial positions—yet to be filled—to address backlogs exceeding pre-pandemic levels. The administration also coordinates enforcement of court orders, public access to proceedings, and adaptations to external pressures, such as wartime surges in security-related cases. While the Israeli Judicial Authority maintains formal independence in core functions, the Ministry's role in and has sparked debates over potential leverage, particularly in resource-constrained environments where executive priorities could indirectly shape priorities.

Corrections, Probation, and Enforcement Services

The and Collection System Authority, subordinate to the , is responsible for executing judicial decisions related to between private entities and for collecting fines, fees, and expenses imposed by courts, including those from criminal convictions. The Authority comprises two primary units: the Execution System, which enforces court-ordered payments through measures such as asset seizures and wage garnishments, and the Center for Collection of Fines, Fees, and Expenses, which handles administrative and judicial penalties like traffic fines and corporate fees. Established to streamline processes independent of private bailiffs, it operates nationwide with a service center accessible via *35592 and maintains offices in . While operational management of correctional facilities falls under the Ministry of National Security via the (IPS), the provides legislative drafting, legal counsel to the government on penal policy, and support for rehabilitation initiatives aligned with mandates. The IPS oversees approximately 32 facilities holding over 21,000 inmates as of mid-2024, emphasizing secure custody alongside vocational training and reintegration programs to reduce . Probation services, administered by the Ministry of Welfare and Social Affairs, involve psychosocial assessments for pre-sentence reports submitted to courts, supervision of offenders under community orders, and parole monitoring, with over 34,200 individuals under supervision as of recent data. The collaborates through judicial integration of these reports, which influence sentencing decisions toward alternatives like community service, reflecting a welfare-oriented approach rooted in principles rather than punitive isolation. This system aims to facilitate offender treatment and societal reintegration, though overcrowding in prisons has prompted expansions in community-based options.

Political Leadership

Role and Powers of the Minister of Justice

The Minister of Justice serves as the political head of Israel's and a member of the cabinet, bearing ultimate responsibility for the ministry's administrative, budgetary, and professional management, including oversight of legal policy formulation and implementation across judicial, correctional, and legislative functions. This role entails ensuring the ministry advances the government's legal agenda while maintaining accountability to the for the performance of the ministry and the broader courts system. The Minister directs the ministry's two primary domains: legislative support, where the department drafts and coordinates government-proposed bills, particularly those concerning civil, criminal, and ; and judicial administration, encompassing courts operations, judge appointments, and enforcement agencies like the . A core statutory power of the Minister is chairing the Judicial Selection Committee, established under section 4 of : The , which comprises nine members—including the Minister as chair, the President of the , two additional justices, two representatives of the Israel Bar Association, and two Knesset members—and holds authority to appoint judges to all courts, from magistrate courts to the , by majority vote, with decisions binding unless overridden by specific legislative thresholds. This committee's composition grants the Minister significant influence over judicial personnel, requiring at least three non-judge members' support for appointments, a mechanism designed to balance executive input with judicial and professional independence but frequently contested in debates over politicization. The Minister also proposes candidates for the Attorney General position, subject to government approval, thereby shaping the state's chief legal advisor who represents the government in court, issues binding legal opinions, and supervises prosecutorial decisions. In legislative matters, the Minister exercises authority to initiate and shepherd government bills through the , leveraging the ministry's Legislative Department—established in 1949—to prepare drafts that align with executive priorities, such as reforms or civil rights codifications, with the Minister personally accountable for their legal soundness and compliance with s. This includes veto-like discretion over ministry-endorsed legislation before cabinet submission. Additionally, the Minister advises the and cabinet on constitutional and issues, coordinates responses to petitions against government actions, and oversees specialized units like the Pardon Department, which recommends clemency to the President, though final pardon authority rests with the latter on counsel. These powers, rooted in : The Government (2001), position the Minister as a pivotal figure in maintaining executive-judicial equilibrium, though empirical analyses highlight tensions arising from the absence of explicit constitutional separation, leading to periodic clashes over appointment delays or reform proposals.

List of Ministers

The Minister of Justice is a cabinet position in the Government of , responsible for overseeing the ministry's operations, including legal advisory to the government, courts administration, and legislative drafting. The role has been held by individuals from various , reflecting shifts in ruling coalitions since the state's founding in 1948. Appointments occur upon or reshuffles, with terms typically aligned to government durations, though interim or acting ministers have occasionally served.
No.NameTerm in officeParty
1Pinchas Rosen1948–1951Progressive Party
—Dov Yosef (acting)1951–1952Mapai
—Pinchas Rosen1952Progressive Party
2Ya'akov Shimshon Shapira1952–1959Mapai
—Pinchas Rosen1959–1961Independent Liberals
3Haim Cohn1961–1969Gahal
—Ya'akov Shimshon Shapira1969Alignment
—Yisrael Bar-Yehuda1969–1970Alignment
—Dov Yosef1970Alignment
—Haim Cohn1970–1977Likud
4Shmuel Tamir1977–1980Likud
5Moshe Nissim1980–1984Likud
6Avraham Sharir1984–1986Likud
—Moshe Nissim1988–1992Likud
7David Libai1992–1996Labor
8Tzachi Hanegbi1996–1997Likud
9Yaakov Neeman1997–1998Not an MK
—David Libai (acting)1998–1999Labor
10Yossi Beilin1999–2001One Israel
11Meir Sheetrit2001–2003Likud
12Yosef Lapid2003–2004Shinui
13Tzipi Livni2004–2006Likud
14Haim Ramon2006–2007Kadima
15Daniel Friedmann2007–2009Not an MK
—Yaakov Neeman2009–2013Not an MK
—Tzipi Livni2013–2014Hatnua
16Tzachi Hanegbi2015 (brief)Likud
17Ayelet Shaked2015–2019Yamina
18Avi Nissenkorn2020–2021Blue and White
19Gideon Sa'ar2021–2022New Hope
20Yariv Levin2022–presentLikud
Note: Some ministers served non-consecutive terms or in acting capacities; numbering reflects primary appointments, excluding actings unless notable. Data compiled from official government records across coalitions.

Interactions with the Judiciary

Historical Tensions Between Executive and Judicial Branches

Tensions between Israel's executive and judicial branches, mediated in part through the Ministry of Justice's role as the government's legal representative, originated in the judiciary's gradual assertion of expansive review powers amid the absence of a formal constitution. From the 1950s, the Supreme Court exercised administrative review under the "reasonableness" doctrine, enabling it to invalidate executive actions deemed arbitrary, but this authority intensified in the 1980s and 1990s under evolving interpretations of quasi-constitutional Basic Laws enacted by the Knesset. The 1995 United Mizrahi Bank v. Migdal ruling formalized constitutional judicial review, empowering the court to strike down ordinary legislation conflicting with Basic Laws like Human Dignity and Liberty (1992), marking a shift where unelected judges could override democratically passed measures. This expansion, driven by Chief Justice Aharon Barak's jurisprudence, extended to broad scrutiny of security and policy decisions, fostering executive resentment over perceived overreach into elected governance. Early flashpoints included interventions in executive military policies, such as the 1979 Elon Moreh decision, where the court halted a settlement built on private Palestinian land, citing violations of and administrative propriety, directly challenging government settlement strategies. The , tasked with defending such actions, faced recurring defeats, amplifying internal debates on ; for instance, in the 1980s, the court repeatedly reviewed military orders in occupied territories, often siding against executive discretion on demolitions and deportations. By the 1990s, conflicts escalated over political appointments, with the court disqualifying figures like in 1999 on moral grounds despite backing, prompting accusations from prime ministers and justice ministers that the judiciary substituted its policy preferences for those of elected officials. The emerged as a focal point for executive pushback, with attorneys general—appointed by the minister—frequently refusing to defend government positions deemed legally untenable, creating intra-executive friction. Historical examples include the 2004-2005 Tal Law saga, where the court pressured the executive to enforce universal draft laws, leading Justice Minister to criticize judicial encroachment on legislative prerogatives. Under right-leaning governments in the 2010s, ministers like (2015-2019) attempted reforms to the Judicial Selection Committee, aiming to increase political influence over appointments to counter the court's perceived left-leaning composition, though these faced judicial and bureaucratic resistance within the ministry itself. Such efforts highlighted causal dynamics: the executive's electoral accountability clashed with the judiciary's insulation, resulting in stalled legislation and public debates over balance, as the ministry drafted proposals like a limited override clause to restore supremacy, only to encounter court threats of invalidation. By the early 2020s, cumulative rulings—such as interventions in coalition formations and prime ministerial appointments amid corruption probes—intensified accusations of judicial politicization, with the under Minister (2021-2022) navigating refusals by to sign off on certain policies, underscoring systemic strains where executive directives were subordinated to prosecutorial vetoes. These tensions reflected deeper structural imbalances: the court's void-filling role in an incomplete constitutional framework enabled over 1,000 annual petitions challenging executive acts, far exceeding typical democratic norms, while the ministry's dual advisory and litigious functions often positioned it as a battleground for branch rivalry. Empirical data from court statistics show executive decisions overturned in approximately 20-30% of reviewed security-related cases pre-2020, fueling demands for recalibration without undermining core rule-of-law protections.

Advocacy for Checks and Balances

The has positioned itself as a proponent of structural reforms to Israel's , arguing that the Supreme Court's expansive powers—developed through doctrines like of legislation and the "reasonableness" standard—have disrupted the equilibrium among branches of government. Under Justice Minister , who assumed the role in December 2022, the ministry advanced proposals in January 2023 to curtail the court's ability to invalidate laws on grounds of unreasonableness, a standard critics within the ministry described as subjective and enabling unelected judges to override democratically enacted policies. Levin's plan emphasized restoring balance by empowering the elected legislature, contending that the absence of a formal and the court's self-granted authority had tilted power away from representative institutions. These efforts built on precedents set during Ayelet Shaked's tenure as Justice Minister from May 2015 to November 2019, when the ministry facilitated appointments to diversify the and incrementally shift influence toward political branches without abolishing key mechanisms. Shaked's administration negotiated judicial selections to include judges aligned with conservative perspectives, aiming to temper the court's perceived liberal dominance while maintaining operational continuity. Proponents, including ministry officials, framed such actions as essential to checks and balances, given Israel's quasi-constitutional framework under Basic Laws, where the court's frequent interventions—such as striking down aspects of the Nation-State Law in 2018—lacked explicit textual grounding and risked substituting judicial policy for legislative intent. In response to partial legislative successes and subsequent High Court rulings, such as the January 2024 decision upholding limits on the reasonableness doctrine, the ministry under Levin persisted in 2025 with compromise proposals co-authored with , seeking veto mechanisms in judicial appointments shared between coalition and opposition to prevent monolithic control by either judges or politicians. These initiatives underscore the ministry's advocacy for formalized overrides and committee reforms, positing that true checks require mutual constraints rather than unilateral judicial supremacy, a view substantiated by the court's historical expansion from advisory roles in the to de facto constitutional guardian by the . While opponents, including elements of the legal establishment, decry these as erosive to minority protections, ministry arguments prioritize empirical democratic legitimacy, noting that elected bodies in parliamentary systems like Israel's inherently reflect pluralistic mandates absent in insulated judicial selection.

Judicial Reform Efforts

Preconditions: Judicial Activism and Overreach (1980s–2020s)

The Israeli Supreme Court began expanding its authority in the 1980s under Chief Justice Meir Shamgar, who broadened standing requirements to allow public petitions on abstract issues and increased review of administrative actions, marking an initial shift toward activism amid the absence of a formal constitution. This laid groundwork for the 1990s "constitutional revolution," led by Aharon Barak upon his ascension to Court president in 1995, where the judiciary assumed expansive interpretive powers over Basic Laws enacted by the Knesset in 1992, such as those on human dignity, liberty, and freedom of occupation. In the pivotal United Mizrahi Bank v. Migdal ruling of November 1995, an 11-justice panel declared these Basic Laws quasi-constitutional, granting the Court unprecedented authority to invalidate ordinary Knesset legislation conflicting with them, without legislative consent for such review or mechanisms like a legislative override. Barak's philosophy, articulated in doctrines asserting "everything is reviewable" and broad diffusion from vague constitutional texts, enabled the to intervene in core policy domains, including and , often prioritizing individual over collective or electoral mandates. Notable instances of alleged overreach include the 2006 striking of a amendment to the and Entry into Law, which temporarily barred Palestinian spouses from residency amid security concerns post-Second , with the deeming it disproportionately violative of family unity despite government evidence of infiltration risks. Similarly, in 2012, the invalidated the Tal Law providing military exemptions for ultra-Orthodox seminary students, ruling it discriminatory after the failed to enact alternatives, effectively dictating enlistment policy without elected consensus. The "" standard, expanded under , further empowered annulment of executive decisions deemed irrational, applied in over 20 cases by the to quash appointments, deportations, and settlement regulations, critics arguing it masked subjective judicial preferences for outcomes misaligned with voter priorities on issues like and . By the 2020s, the Court's record included voiding around 22 primary laws since 1948, with most post-1995, a tally reflecting moderate frequency but profound impact given the judiciary's insulation—judges selected via a dominated by sitting justices and bar elites, lacking public or political . This structure, combined with unlimited jurisdiction and no formal in Israel's framework, engendered systemic tensions, as the unelected bench frequently substituted its policy views for those of the and , particularly frustrating right-wing administrations on matters like judicial appointments and vetoes. Such dynamics, rooted in the 1980s-1990s power consolidation, crystallized preconditions for reform by highlighting causal imbalances: an over-empowered judiciary eroding democratic legitimacy without reciprocal checks, fueling demands to recalibrate authority toward elected institutions.

2023–2024 Reform Proposals and Implementation Attempts

In January 2023, following the formation of Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition government after the November 2022 elections, Justice Minister , heading the Ministry of Justice, introduced a comprehensive set of proposals aimed at restructuring Israel's judicial system. The plan sought to address perceived imbalances in judicial power, including reforms to the Judicial Selection Committee—proposing that politicians hold a majority of seats to reduce judges' influence over appointments—and the introduction of a mechanism allowing the to override rulings with a simple majority vote. Additional elements targeted the "" doctrine, under which courts could annul government decisions deemed extremely unreasonable, and proposed limiting the court's ability to review Basic Laws. The , under Levin's direction, drafted and advanced these bills through Knesset committees throughout early 2023, amid widespread public protests that drew hundreds of thousands weekly, including reservists refusing service and international concern over democratic . On July 24, 2023, the narrowly passed the first major component: an amendment to : abolishing the reasonableness standard, fulfilling one key Ministry-backed objective to curb judicial intervention in executive decisions. Other proposals, such as judicial selection changes and the override clause, advanced to preliminary readings but stalled due to infighting and escalating demonstrations; Netanyahu paused further implementation in late March 2023 after Defense Minister Yoav Gallant's dismissal sparked unrest, though efforts resumed sporadically. The October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks shifted national priorities, effectively halting reform momentum as the government focused on war efforts, with Levin notifying the High Court on November 5, 2023, of intent to convene the Judicial Selection Committee within 15 days but deferring broader action. In 2024, implementation attempts faced definitive setbacks when, on January 1, the Supreme Court, in an 8-7 decision, struck down the July 2023 reasonableness amendment—the first time it invalidated a Basic Law—ruling it exceeded legislative bounds and undermined judicial review's foundational role. A concurrent 10-1 ruling affirmed the court's authority to review Basic Laws for proportionality, blocking Ministry plans reliant on unchecked legislative supremacy. By late 2024, Levin expressed intent to revive reforms in response to these rulings, but no further bills passed amid ongoing war and political divisions, leaving the Ministry's 2023–2024 efforts largely unrealized beyond the overturned reasonableness law. The enactment of the July 24, 2023, amendment to : The Judiciary represented the sole major legislative success of the package, eliminating the Supreme Court's authority to invalidate government decisions deemed "unreasonable" in an extreme or disproportionate manner. This change, advanced by Justice Minister Yariv Levin's office within the , aimed to curb what proponents viewed as judicial overreach in administrative oversight. Petitions challenging the amendment's constitutionality were swiftly filed, prompting the (HCJ), acting as the , to convene an expanded 15-justice panel. On January 1, 2024, the court invalidated the law by an 8-7 vote, holding that it inflicted substantial and specific harm on Israel's democratic character by undermining core mechanisms entrenched in other s, such as those protecting human dignity and . This ruling marked the first time the court struck down a amendment, intensifying claims from reform advocates that it exemplified the very judicial supremacy the changes sought to address. Broader reform elements, including proposals to alter judicial selection processes for greater Knesset influence and to limit the attorney general's standing to challenge government actions, failed to advance amid mass protests exceeding 500,000 participants weekly by mid-2023. The October 7, 2023, attacks and ensuing Gaza war shifted national priorities, prompting Prime Minister to suspend non-war-related legislation in October 2023, effectively halting implementation efforts. Debates persist into 2025, with supporters, including elements within the , contending that unchecked judicial veto power distorts elected governance and requires recalibration to align with . Opponents, citing the HCJ's 2024 decision as a bulwark against executive dominance, argue that further changes risk eroding protections for minorities and in Israel's majoritarian system lacking a formal . Renewed pushes for judicial selection committee modifications surfaced by March 2025, yet wartime unity and public fatigue have tempered progress, leaving the intact amid unresolved tensions over institutional balance.

Controversies and Criticisms

The oversees the legal framework for , a measure allowing indefinite holding without based on secret indicating threats, primarily applied to individuals suspected of . This policy, defended by the ministry in court, is authorized under the Emergency Powers (Detentions) Law for Israeli territory and military orders in the , with initial orders issued by military commanders and subject to by Israeli courts. As of November 2023, the ministry published lists of approximately 300 administrative detainees eligible for potential release in hostage exchanges, highlighting the scale of such holdings amid ongoing conflicts. While the , under the Ministry of Public Security, manages facilities housing over 10,000 security prisoners—defined as those convicted or suspected of nationalistically motivated violence—the influences conditions through legislation, State Attorney representations in petitions, and policy advisories from the Attorney General. A 2017 ministry report acknowledged violations including inadequate standards, disproportionate force, and subpar medical care in prisons, prompting recommendations for reform though implementation has been uneven. Critics, including Physicians for Israel, argue the ministry has failed to enforce robust external oversight, contributing to opacity in facilities like Sde Teiman, where post-October 7, 2023, detentions surged to thousands amid reports of overcrowding and resource strains. Post-2023 attacks, controversies intensified over alleged abuses against Palestinian security detainees, including beatings, humiliation, and documented in over 20 cases across multiple facilities, as reported by the UN Commission of Inquiry—claims the ministry has contested as unrepresentative of policy. The ministry supported government positions denying International Red Cross access to prevent intelligence leaks, drawing sharp rebuke in August 2025 for undermining humanitarian standards without sufficient justification. Similarly, in September 2025, the court ruled that reduced food rations violated detainees' , mandating improvements after petitions highlighted and nutritional deficits, with the ministry's defense emphasizing security constraints over immediate welfare enhancements. These rulings underscore tensions between security imperatives—such as isolating high-risk inmates to avert attacks—and legal obligations under , which prohibits arbitrary detention but permits extensions based on classified evidence reviewed . Advocacy groups like have accused the ministry of enabling indefinite renewals without , potentially amounting to , though Israeli officials counter that such measures have thwarted numerous plots, citing intelligence successes. In October 2024, ministry-backed legislation advanced to restrict family visits for security prisoners, prioritizing prevention of external coordination over visitation rights, amid ongoing debates over proportionality. Empirical data from court-monitored cases reveals periodic compliance gaps, with hunger strikes and deaths in custody prompting further scrutiny, yet the ministry maintains that isolated incidents do not reflect systemic failure given the threats posed by detainees linked to groups like .

Accusations of Political Interference and Bias Claims

In August 2025, Justice Minister directed staff to change the locks on an office shared with in , leading to claims that the ministry was obstructing the AG's independent oversight of prosecutions, including those against . Baharav-Miara petitioned the , arguing the move violated legal protocols and aimed to sideline her input on sensitive matters like Netanyahu's ongoing corruption trial. Levin countered that the space was his private office, denying any intent to interfere with AG functions. Critics, including opposition lawmakers from parties like the Movement for Quality Government, accused Levin of escalating politicization by refusing to adhere to court directives on judicial appointments, such as convening the committee to select a new president by January 16, 2025, despite a December 2024 ruling deeming his inaction non-compliant. This standoff, which Levin publicly decried as judicial overreach by "dictators," fueled broader allegations that the ministry under his leadership prioritizes coalition interests over institutional neutrality. The had previously issued temporary orders in August 2025 mandating Levin's compliance to prevent constitutional deadlock. Conversely, Netanyahu and government allies have leveled bias claims against the ministry's state prosecution service, asserting favoring left-leaning figures while targeting right-wing politicians. In February 2025, Netanyahu described indictments against two of his aides for alleged leaks as "political persecution" orchestrated by the State Attorney's Office, part of the Justice Ministry's prosecutorial apparatus. Supporters argue this reflects systemic partiality, citing the office's role in Netanyahu's own trials on and charges since 2019, where evidence of regulatory favors for media coverage was presented but contested as fabricated by defense teams. Baharav-Miara dismissed accusations during a April 2025 Knesset hearing on leak investigations, maintaining that decisions followed evidentiary standards without political motive. Earlier precedents include 2015 accusations against then-Justice Minister for "judicial interference and incitement" after she posted a video vowing consequences for judges ruling against administrative detentions of security suspects, which opponents viewed as an attempt to intimidate the into aligning with government security policies. Such incidents underscore recurring tensions, where ministry actions under politically aligned ministers are scrutinized for blurring executive influence over prosecutorial and appointment processes nominally insulated for independence. The Ministry of Justice has advanced legal infrastructure through the implementation of the Net HaMishpat electronic case management system, which went live in 2010 and facilitates remote filing, case tracking, and proceedings across civil, criminal, and labor courts. This platform integrates operations for judges, litigants, attorneys, and court staff, reducing paperwork and enabling electronic submissions, with over 90% of court communications digitized by 2020. The system has improved efficiency, with courts handling millions of cases annually while minimizing delays, contributing to Israel's ranking among the top nations for judicial digitization in regional assessments. Complementing this, the Ministry has expanded online digital services since the early 2010s, allowing citizens to complete legal tasks such as services, registrations, and inheritance proceedings remotely via the government's portal. By 2020, these initiatives had digitized numerous procedures, enhancing accessibility and reducing administrative burdens, particularly during the when courts maintained operations for urgent matters like arrests and petitions without interruption. This continuity upheld principles by ensuring of emergency regulations and access to justice amid lockdowns. In bolstering foundations, the Ministry's legislative drafting and oversight roles have supported frameworks, including compliance with international standards like FATF recommendations, where demonstrated effective risk assessments by 2018. These efforts, combined with the Department's provision of representation in over 100,000 cases yearly, have reinforced equitable access to , particularly for low-income individuals, fostering in legal institutions through verifiable and transparency measures.

References

  1. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/ministry_of_justice/govil-landing-page
  2. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israeli-ministry-of-justice
  3. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/about_ministry_of_justice
  4. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/the_judiciary_authority_history
  5. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/history-and-overview-of-israel-s-judicial-branch
  6. https://m.knesset.gov.il/en/mk/government/pages/governments.aspx
  7. https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1787&context=nyls_law_review
  8. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-65086871
  9. https://tcf.org/content/report/assault-israels-judiciary/
  10. https://fedsoc.org/fedsoc-review/the-peculiar-case-of-the-israeli-legal-system
  11. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/declaration-of-establishment-state-of-israel
  12. https://www.nli.org.il/en/a-topic/987007312969205171
  13. https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/israel1.html
  14. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/isr.2010.15.1.25
  15. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13531042.2023.2235784
  16. https://law.haifa.ac.il/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/theLegalTransformation.pdf
  17. https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/israel.html
  18. https://israeled.org/israels-state-commissions-of-inquiry-law/
  19. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3158398
  20. https://www.academia.edu/76078667/The_Civil_Codes_Israeli_Report
  21. https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Israel-Penal-Law-5737-1977-eng.pdf
  22. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4297497
  23. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/israel-law-review/article/codification-of-civil-law-and-the-law-of-torts/E2638107A006061756F9AE56552D0DD0
  24. https://m.knesset.gov.il/EN/activity/documents/BasicLawsPDF/BasicLawTheJudiciary.pdf
  25. https://countrystudies.us/israel/84.htm
  26. https://iacajournal.org/articles/10.36745/ijca.383
  27. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3039979
  28. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-08-29/ty-article/.premium/israeli-court-system-under-major-strain-from-rising-cases-and-judge-shortage-report-finds/0000018a-3d98-dc3d-ab8f-bfdcdd670002
  29. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/wfbcjsis.pdf
  30. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2021-12-16/ty-article/.premium/israels-justice-minister-says-more-prisons-are-the-solution-to-overcrowding/0000017f-ed3d-dc91-a17f-fdbd01d80000
  31. https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-754183
  32. https://en.idi.org.il/tags-en/47383
  33. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/israel-s-renewed-judicial-overhaul
  34. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-justice-minister-is-creating-a-dictatorship-in-the-judicial-system/
  35. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/director_general_unit
  36. https://www.timesofisrael.com/levin-said-set-to-name-aide-with-no-legal-qualifications-as-justice-ministry-chief/
  37. https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/aboutoffice/about_ministry_of_justice/en/organizational-structure-text.pdf
  38. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/courts_administration
  39. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/attorney_general
  40. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/planning_policy
  41. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/professional_units_licenses_regulation/govil-landing-page
  42. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/finance
  43. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/it_moj
  44. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/legal_counsel_and_legislative_affairs/govil-landing-page
  45. https://en.idi.org.il/articles/48989
  46. https://www.rotenberglaw.co.il/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/The_Judiciary_The_Israeli_Court_System.pdf
  47. https://rm.coe.int/israel/1680b1df6d
  48. https://www.timesofisrael.com/case-burden-on-courts-unparalleled-says-courts-administration-director/
  49. http://www.gov.il/en/pages/about_the_judiciary_authority
  50. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/law_enforcement_and_collection_system_authority/govil-landing-page
  51. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/about_law_enforcement_and_collection_system_authority
  52. https://justice-trends.press/israeli-corrections-in-transition-more-prisons-but-also-more-alternatives/
  53. https://www.972mag.com/israel-prisons-scabies/
  54. https://globcci.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Israel-Community-Corrections-Probation-Parole-ISRAEL-PROFILE-website-short-2025-1.pdf
  55. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/probation-israel-international-perspective
  56. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/ReducingReoffending/MS/Israel_-_GOI_-_CCPCJ2022_-_27.7.22.pdf
  57. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/units/minister_of_justice
  58. https://main.knesset.gov.il/en/mk/apps/mklobby/main/current-knesset-mks/government-positions
  59. https://knesset.gov.il/constitution/ConstP10_eng.htm
  60. https://en.idi.org.il/articles/55754
  61. https://natlex.ilo.org/dyn/natlex2/natlex2/files/download/86611/ISR86611.pdf
  62. https://knesset.gov.il/constitution/ConstP9_eng.htm
  63. https://main.knesset.gov.il/EN/mk/government/Pages/governments.aspx
  64. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israel-cabinet-ministers-thirty-fifth-government
  65. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israel-cabinet-ministers-thirty-sixth-government
  66. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israel-cabinet-ministers-thirty-seventh-government
  67. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=14298&context=journal_articles
  68. https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/5194/Inventing_Judicial_Review___Israel_and_America.pdf?sequence=2
  69. https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/viewpoints/summary-cases-israeli-supreme-court-2019-2020
  70. https://www.jns.org/israels-executive-judiciary-branches-skirmish-as-judicial-reform-war-looms/
  71. https://academic.oup.com/icon/article/23/1/179/8148804
  72. https://www.timesofisrael.com/justice-minister-unveils-plan-to-shackle-the-high-court-overhaul-israels-judiciary/
  73. https://www.timesofisrael.com/justice-minister-insists-judicial-changes-will-keep-supreme-court-independent/
  74. https://www.timesofisrael.com/shaked-tells-toi-she-was-able-to-diversify-the-judiciary-under-current-system/
  75. https://www.jns.org/levin-saar-proposal-provides-a-path-forward-for-israeli-judicial-reform/
  76. https://www.timesofisrael.com/overhaul-redux-levins-compromise-proposal-would-again-radically-constrain-the-judiciary/
  77. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-new-israeli-government-s-constitutional-law-reforms-why-now-what-do-they-mean-and-what-will-happen-next
  78. https://en.idi.org.il/articles/52247
  79. https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2815&context=tlr
  80. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1535824/full
  81. https://www.daat.ac.il/daat/ezrachut/english/hillel.htm
  82. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/understanding-israel-s-debate-over-judicial-reform
  83. https://en.idi.org.il/articles/31874
  84. https://sapirjournal.org/israel-at-75/2023/israel-is-in-need-of-judicial-reform/
  85. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389846589_Reconceptualizing_the_1990s_judicial_revolution_in_Israel_and_its_implications_for_2023-25
  86. https://verfassungsblog.de/the-judicial-overhaul-post-october-7/
  87. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67859177
  88. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-supreme-court-strikes-down-disputed-law-that-limited-court-oversight-2024-01-01/
  89. https://www.ajc.org/news/what-to-know-about-israels-judicial-reforms
  90. https://www.timesofisrael.com/in-historic-ruling-high-court-strikes-down-key-judicial-overhaul-legislation/
  91. https://en.idi.org.il/articles/52335
  92. https://www.jns.org/they-left-us-no-choice-levin-says-on-reboot-of-judicial-reform-drive/
  93. https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/24/middleeast/israel-judicial-reforms-vote-explained-mime-intl
  94. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/24/what-is-israel-judicial-overhaul-vote-about-what-happens-next
  95. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-hcj-strikes-back-israel-s-supreme-court-pulls-the-plug-on-judicial-reform
  96. https://verfassungsblog.de/did-the-israeli-supreme-court-kill-the-constitutional-coup/
  97. https://www.ajc.org/judicialreform
  98. https://ijsmr.in/doc/ijsmr08_42.pdf
  99. https://www.hamoked.org/items/90_eng.pdf
  100. https://www.gov.il/en/Departments/General/ado
  101. https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/29/middleeast/palestinian-prisoners-israeli-judicial-system-west-bank-mime-intl
  102. https://www.state.gov/reports/2024-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/israel-west-bank-and-gaza
  103. https://www.phr.org.il/en/justice-ministry-report-criticizes-incarceration-conditions/
  104. https://www.phr.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/PHRI_Report_Oversight-of-Israeli-Prisons_2008.pdf
  105. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-sde-teiman-hcj-judgment--too-little--too-late
  106. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/report-of-the-independent-international-commission-of-inquiry-on-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-including-east-jerusalem-and-israel-11sep24/
  107. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-08-19/ty-article/.premium/israels-top-court-slams-government-for-handling-of-security-prisoners/00000198-c2a1-d658-ad9c-e2f70d860000
  108. https://main.knesset.gov.il/en/news/pressreleases/pages/press16925t.aspx
  109. https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel-at-war/artc-israel-s-supreme-court-orders-improved-food-supply-for-security-prisoners
  110. https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/high-court-majority-rules-israel-173146412.html
  111. https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/mde150031997en.pdf
  112. https://www.timesofisrael.com/ministers-back-bill-denying-the-pa-a-path-to-petition-the-high-court-of-justice/
  113. https://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention
  114. https://www.timesofisrael.com/levin-tells-high-court-the-office-he-locked-ag-out-of-is-his-private-space/
  115. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-10-17/ty-article/.premium/israels-ag-opposes-bill-that-would-allow-political-interference-in-netanyahus-trial/00000199-f282-d54a-abfb-f7d27f740000
  116. https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/08/13/why-was-the-attorney-general-locked-out-by-justice-minister/
  117. https://www.timesofisrael.com/constitutional-crisis-flares-as-levin-given-deadline-to-appoint-new-supreme-court-chief/
  118. https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-864118
  119. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/political-persecution-netanyahu-slams-ag-over-indictment-of-aides/
  120. https://www.timesofisrael.com/at-knesset-hearing-ag-dismisses-accusation-of-selective-enforcement-in-leak-cases/
  121. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/11798331/Israeli-justice-minister-accused-of-interference-and-incitement-after-video-threat.html
  122. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/net_law_info2
  123. https://library.mevaker.gov.il/sites/DigitalLibrary/Documents/2022/2022.3/EN/2022.3-304-NET-Taktzir-EN.pdf
  124. https://rm.coe.int/en-israel-2018/16809fe310
  125. https://www.gov.il/en/pages/online-digital-services
  126. https://www.un.org/en/ga/sixth/75/pdfs/statements/rule_of_law/08mtg_israel.pdf
  127. https://www.gov.il/BlobFolder/reports/corruption_publications/he/Doc01_0.pdf
  128. https://www.gov.il/blobFolder/dynamiccollectorresultitem/israel-mer-2018/he/periodic-docs_Israel_MER_2018.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.