The High Court of Justice has ordered Justice Minister Yariv Levin to refrain from advancing appointment procedures based on the new Department of Internal Police Investigations (DIU) law until a decision is reached by the Attorney General. The current decision focuses on halting the practical progress of appointments, specifically the selection of a new director for the DIU, as long as the requests for interim relief submitted to the court remain unresolved. It must be clarified that this court action is merely a procedural interim decision and does not constitute a definitive ruling on the constitutionality of the law or a resolution of the substantive case filed by the Movement for Quality Government.
The decision comes against the backdrop of a petition filed by the Movement for Quality Government, which raises significant concerns regarding the new appointment mechanism established in recent legislation. According to the petitioner, the new mechanism grants the Justice Minister and the ministry's Director-General excessive influence over the selection process for the DIU director, a position requiring high levels of independence. The movement argues that the current model, which allows for a six-year term appointment, could undermine the independence of the department tasked with investigating law enforcement conduct.
During legal proceedings, the movement emphasized that continuing appointment procedures at this time, before the petitions have been addressed on their merits, could create a "fait accompli" situation that would make it difficult for the judiciary to restore the status quo should it eventually be determined that the law does not meet required legal standards. The immediate practical effect of the High Court's decision is the freezing of all recruitment processes for the senior position. Thereby, the court sought to ensure the integrity of the administrative procedure and the preservation of the ability to obtain effective relief if justification is found.
The legal system now awaits the decision of Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is required to formulate her position on this complex issue before the Justice Minister can proceed with his plans to appoint the next head of the DIU. As of this stage, the parties are awaiting the upcoming hearing on the request for interim relief, where the court is expected to examine the arguments in depth before determining the subsequent legal framework or ruling on the legality of the existing mechanism.