9 September 2026וואלה – RSS חדשות בסינון משפטי

High Court Rejects AG’s Position: Civil Service Commissioner Cannot Block Dismissals Alone

In a precedent-setting ruling by a five-judge panel, the High Court determined that the Civil Service Commissioner lacks the authority to independently block the Minister of Economy’s request to dismiss the Competition Commissioner. The Court clarified that authority to review such requests rests with the Appointments Committee, not the professional echelon of the Commission.

Source transparency

This is an original newsroom summary and analysis. The source was not reproduced, and readers can inspect the original publication.

Original publication at וואלה – RSS חדשות בסינון משפטי

Why it matters

The ruling regulates the balance of power between the political echelon and the Civil Service Commission, clarifying that professional bodies do not possess absolute blocking authority over the dismissal processes of senior officials.

Key points

  • ▪The High Court ruled that the Civil Service Commissioner cannot unilaterally block requests for official dismissals.
  • ▪The authority to decide on such requests belongs to the Appointments Committee, not the Commission’s professional staff.
  • ▪Deputy President Sohlberg criticized the legal counsel for presenting an inaccurate legal assessment.
  • ▪The Court did not rule on the allegations against Adv. Michal Cohen or mandate her dismissal.
  • ▪The process was influenced by significant time elapsed and the country's entry into an election period.

In a significant ruling published recently, the High Court of Justice rejected the position of the Attorney General, Adv. Gali Baharav-Miara, and established clear boundaries for the powers of the Civil Service Commissioner regarding the termination of high-ranking officials. The case involves the Minister of Economy's request to terminate the tenure of the Competition Commissioner, Adv. Michal Cohen, a move that faced barriers from the then-Civil Service Commissioner, Prof. Daniel Hershkowitz. According to a Walla report, the dispute stems from allegations raised by the Minister in January 2024, citing a clear lack of suitability for the role and a persistent crisis of trust between himself and the Commissioner, who was appointed in 2022.

Despite the Minister’s request, the Civil Service Commissioner chose not to forward the matter for discussion before the Appointments Committee, a decision that led to a petition to the High Court of Justice. After the High Court ruled in July 2025 that the Commissioner had exceeded his authority, a request for a further hearing before an expanded panel was submitted. However, the Court has now rejected the Attorney General’s position and the state's arguments, reaffirming its original ruling. Supreme Court President Yitzhak Amit emphasized that in the circumstances, there was no justification for preventing the committee from convening.

Furthermore, Deputy President Noam Sohlberg sharply criticized the government's legal counsel, claiming that the Commissioner was presented with a distorted legal picture. Sohlberg also expressed dissatisfaction with the protracted delays in handling the request, which began in early 2024, noting that stalling the procedure for over two years results in denied justice. It is important to emphasize that the High Court’s ruling does not constitute a decision on the merits of the dismissal request, and the Court did not determine that the Commissioner must be removed. The decision focuses on the procedural aspect: the authority to decide whether to continue the dismissal process rests with the Appointments Committee, which may decide to close the file if necessary, rather than the Commissioner alone. Now that the injunction delaying the proceedings has been lifted, the matter may return to the committee. However, it should be noted that as Israel is in an election period, the continuation of the process will be subject to the relevant rules and guidelines for this sensitive period.

General information only. This item is not legal advice and does not replace review of the original source.

Back to all legal news

LawFirms.pro

Update or Remove Public Information

LawFirms.pro allows lawyers and the public to submit requests to update, correct, or remove public information for manual review.

Update or Remove Profile