Full Breakdown
Israeli Supreme Court Suspends Key Provisions of Police Investigation Department Reform
9/5/2026, 1:51:00 AM
Core Decision
On Thursday the High Court of Justice issued an interim order that freezes four provisions of the law restructuring Israel’s Police Investigation Department (PID). The order, issued by Court President Isaac Amit and Justice Dafna Barak-Erez in a 2-1 vote, blocks the appointment of a new PID director, the formation of the five-member selection committee, the creation of a dispute-resolution official, and the establishment of a separate PID budget. Deputy Supreme Court President Noam Sohlberg dissented. The ruling does not invalidate the law itself; a hearing on three petitions seeking its cancellation is scheduled for December 28, two months after the October 27 election.
Background of the Reform
The Knesset approved the restructuring bill on June 11 by a vote of 43 to 39 after it was proposed by Likud MK Moshe Saada and promoted by Justice Minister Yariv Levin. The law, published on June 15, would separate the PID from the State Attorney’s Office and place it within the Justice Ministry as an independent unit. Under the new scheme the PID director would acquire powers now held by the attorney-general, state attorney and district prosecutors in criminal cases handled by the PID. The legislation also creates a “coordinator for police investigations” with authority to decide appeals, resolve inter-agency disputes, and transfer cases between the PID and other bodies.
Official Positions
President Amit and Justice Barak-Erez indicated they weighed the petitioners’ concerns alongside the Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara’s support for an interim order, citing immediate consequences for the PID and the election period. Baharav-Miara warned that the appointment process could expose criminal-law enforcement to political influence and chill police, investigators, and prosecutors. Justice Minister Levin, in court filings, argued that the appointment process should proceed despite the election, emphasizing the law’s requirement that the committee be formed within one month and that the director and coordinator be appointed “as soon as possible.”
Criticism and Opposition
Petitioners and the Attorney-General contend that the new appointment system allows direct or substantial involvement by Levin or the Justice Ministry director-general in selecting three of the five committee members, raising concerns about politicization. Levin responded by sharply criticizing the justices, accusing a “handful” of them of trying to protect what he described as a failed institution.
Upcoming Proceedings
The court’s interim order remains in effect while the hearing scheduled for December 28 will consider the three petitions seeking cancellation of the law. Most of the overhaul is slated to take effect in February 2027, with a possible four-month postponement, meaning the current suspension halts any steps toward establishing the new department before that date.
