I don't know if there is any truth to the reports that the public security minister in the next government will have more powers over the police. Former Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan once told me that when he held that portfolio he demanded that then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu amend the law on that matter, but it never happened. 

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Politically biased enforcement can deal a devastating blow to democracy and the legitimacy of uniformed officers. The problem is that the general public is no longer interested in the discourse on Israel's democratic character. Even the unthinkable void of not appointing a permanent police commissioner for two years didn't elicit a public outcry.

There were those "crazies" like me who talked about this in the media and in various professional forums, but I could not sense there being any real public pressure, even when politicians tried to use the appointment as part of the haggling in various political deals. 

When I meet with educators, even civics teachers, I am shocked by how much ignorance there is on the basic chain of command and whom the commissioner reports to. The answers people provide are just embarrassing, and the vast majority of respondents are unaware that although the chief of staff of the IDF reports to the defense minister, the heads of the Mossad and the Shin Bet security service report ot the prime minister, and that the police commissioner is accountable only to the law. 

Even when the lines became blurred by then-Public Security Minister Amir Ohana when he meddled in appointments within the police ranks – including by tapping people who lacked the necessary skills – there was silence in the general public. Now, when likely public security portfolio will go to someone who boasts about police officers kowtowing to him, it all but confirms the massive damage inflicted on the police force in those years. 

The public apathy can be explained because it has been told that the biggest problem they face is the lack of personal security and that therefore the government must get more "governability", which according to this narrative means more meddling of politicians in the affairs of  the "bureaucrats." 

What no one told the public is that personal security and national strength have actually been compromised because of this very interference in how the police do its job. No one told the public that the Netanyahu government made sure to slash the budgets for law-enforcement activities by hundreds of millions of shekels, including by ending the massive effort to crack down on crime in Arab communities. 

It also ended the implementation of a six-year plan the police has already signed off on and cut the presence of bobbies on the beat and essentially destroyed the technological apparatus that had been built. 

The ethnic riots that took place amidst the Gaza flare-up in 2021, known as Operation Guardian of the Walls, were a direct consequence of this neglect. This lack of resources is what allowed the radicals in the Islamic Movement to rear their heads despite being outlawed, including by resuming their malign influence on the Temple Mount provocateurs and their collaboration with crime syndicates. 

I hope the new minister will enlist experts on criminology and internalize that policing requires direct outreach to minorities and other communities. Any other approach will only erode the public's sense of security. If personal security is important, it's better to realize this before things descend into chaos. 

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Politicians should stop meddling in law enforcement appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The appointment of a new IDF chief of staff during a caretaker government is a worthy discourse, although in my opinion, less crucial than made out to be.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

Or at least that is what I thought until I heard people quote MK Yoav Kisch's tweet in which he threatened to oust Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara if she accepted Defense Minister Benny Gantz's request for the appointment of the next military chief, should Likud return to power again.
What can one conclude from this?

Perhaps that the role of the attorney general is a political one and serves clear political interests, and as such, must be replaced by either a political institution that will serve the new government's interests, or an apolitical institution. Either way, there is no other way to understand this except that the existing institution is political, and can therefore no longer continue to exist in its current form.

The position is part of the law enforcement system, but beyond that, so long there isn't a binding interpretation by a court, an attorney general is the authorized interpreter of the law that binds the government. Indeed, it is possible to appeal to the Supreme Court and give legitimacy to the judiciary, after years of its trust being undermined.

I was happy to hear that the head of the opposition denounced the comments, but I have not yet heard an apology from Kisch himself, or whoever said that the attorney general would be replaced "anyway." If that's the case, why are things proceeding relatively quietly?

Perhaps because we have gotten used to, so to speak, such degrading treatment of anyone who was not elected by the public. In old democracies, it is common to refer to them as "civil servants," those who safeguard the apolitical public interest and are unaffected by government changes.

In Israel, they are officials. Professionals in areas such as education, health, welfare, and others, who on the one hand, must implement the elected officials' policies and on the other, constantly represent a larger public interest.

Another reason for the quiet might be perhaps because we have gotten used to this unbearable price. Contrary to the attorney general, the chief of staff needs to have confidence in the implementation of government policy. However, he is in charge of the IDF. Some of them voted for parties that are part of the government, some didn't, and some have not yet been elected.

Each and every one of them risks their lives in their "shift" for the safety and security of the country. If the appointment of the chief of staff is perceived as a political issue, what will be the significance of a soldier sacrificing his life if the chief of staff is not "his"?

We all remember how despite the attorney general's approval, the public affairs minister chose not to appoint a police chief in the interim government, which left us without one for two years. Is anyone making sure that something like this does not happen again?

I suppose I'm not adding anything new here, and if Kisch does not recant his words, it seems he thinks the price might be worth it, to achieve some kind of political interest.

I suggest we all recover. The destruction caused by this messiah in recent years has even undermined trust in our "sacred space," the IDF, which almost every Israeli household identifies with. We should just remember that it is not for nothing that trust in political parties is the lowest of all.

Yes, this too is a danger to democracy, which Knesset members have to deal with.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post The dangers of manipulating legal appointments appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.