Fundamental Legal Foundation: The Advisory Committee and its Functions
- The decision to appoint Maj. Goffman to the position of head of the Mossad was made following the recommendation of the Advisory Committee for Appointments to Senior Positions. This committee was established, for the first time, in 1997, with a slightly different composition than the current practice (see: Resolution 2225 of the 27th Government, "Advisory Committee on Appointments to Senior Positions in the Civil Service Discussed in the Government" (June 20, 1997)), and since 1999 it has been operating in a similar format, which is currently anchored in Resolution 3839 (for details on previous government decisions, see: Assaf Shapira, "The Powers of the Committee for the Appointment of Senior Officials in the Public Service" 2 (Israel Democracy Institute, Review, 2018) (hereinafter: Shapira). See also: High Court of Justice 911/21 The Movement for Quality Government in Israel v. Government of Israel, para. 11 (December 12, 2021) (hereinafter: the Shabtai Appointment Case)). The committee is headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, and by virtue of his position, the Civil Service Commissioner serves alongside him. In addition, the committee includes two public representatives (as of 2018 - one public representative served. See paragraph C of Resolution 3839). According to Resolution 3839, public representatives are appointed to the committee by the government, in consultation with the Attorney General. Representatives of the public and the chairman of the committee are appointed for a single term of 8 years, with no possibility of extension (ibid.).
- The role of the advisory committee is to examine the appointments to seven of the most senior positions in the public service: the heads of security organizations (the IDF, the police, the Shin Bet, the Mossad, and the Prison Service), the governor of the Bank of Israel, and his deputy (these positions will be referred to as the seven senior positions). See: Section A of Resolution 3839). The examination conducted by the committee is focused on examining the candidate's moral suitability for the position, and in the words of Resolution 3839: "The committee will give its opinion regarding the integrity of the appointment in order to ensure that improper appointments are not made, inter alia, for reasons such as personal affiliation, business affiliation, or political affiliation with a government minister" (ibid., in section B). The concept underlying the role assigned to the committee is that in the State of Israel, even a person who is professionally qualified, in terms of his skills and experience, to head one of the main public systems, cannot be appointed to the position if he adheres to it a fundamental failure of values (compare: High Court of Justice 4668/01 Sarid v. Prime Minister, IsrSC 56(2) 265, 280, 284 (2001) (hereinafter: the Orphan Appointment Case). For further information, see: High Court of Justice 37830-08-24 Lewis Brandeis Institute for Society, Economy and Democracy v. Government of Israel, paragraphs 8 and 33 of the judgment of President Yitzhak Amit (May 12, 2025) (petition for an additional hearing was accepted as part of an additional hearing70105-05-25); Shapira, at pp. 5-6).
- The Advisory Committee therefore operates within relatively limited limits: it deals with a closed list of officers in the main security organizations and the Bank of Israel; it does not locate candidates for the position in question; nor does it examine, in the broad sense, the suitability of candidates for the position, but only the "integrity of the appointment", of both the appointer and the appointee (compare: High Court of Justice 2699/11 The Movement for Quality Government v. Government of Israel, Paragraph 6 (May 17, 2011)). To be sure, the role of the committee is indeed limited - but it is critical. The positions for which she examines are among the most senior positions in the public service, and in these positions the importance of maintaining integrity is of cardinal importance. The tension in the committee's activities stems from the fact that, on the one hand, the main security organizations should be led by those whom the prime minister and her ministers have found most suitable for the job; But on the other hand, it is essential that those who head these security organizations have an independent position vis-à-vis the elected echelon, in light of the danger inherent in harnessing the central security organizations (or the Bank of Israel) for the short-term interests of one government or another. To this, it should be added that these organizations are characterized by the fact that judicial review of their activities is limited in nature, and therefore the existence of checks and balances within the organizations themselves is essential in order to prevent the politicization of the most sensitive functions of the executive branch, including law enforcement, the use of force, and the formulation of macroeconomic policies. In other words, bodies that have a wallet or a sword. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that the heads of these organizations have a moral-ethical stature and an internal compass that will prevent them from deviating from the norm. This is the task of the Advisory Committee.
- These considerations are at the basis of the interpretation given in the case law to the role of the advisory committee. In the case law, it was clarified that the committee's mandate is "to examine the proposed appointment in terms of moral integrity in the broad sense of this concept, both from the point of view of the person proposed for the position, from the point of view of the appointing body, and from any other possible aspect that may have to do with the question of moral integrity involved in the appointment" (High Court of Justice 1570/07 Ometz v. Minister of Public Security, para. 3 (February 25, 2007). See also: High Court of Justice 61641-08-24 The Movement for Quality Government in Israel v. Government of Israel, para. 10 (December 1, 2024) (hereinafter: the Levy Appointment Case)). This examination is essentially a moral examination, and it is intended to ensure that those who are appointed to high-level positions in the public service will be worthy of it, not only from the professional aspect:
The strength and strength of the public service depends on the personal and professional level of its employees. This level is built on two main pillars: the professional ability to meet the duties of the job, and the moral-ethical level, which is intended to ensure proper protection of the norms and values required in the public service. The strength and resilience of the public service depends on the human and professional element that staff the public service, and especially on the people who are elected to the leadership positions of this service. A proper appointment process that will ensure the candidate's qualifications is an essential condition for maintaining the level of public service and is his breathing room. Without him, his status and ability to bear the responsibilities imposed on him would not be guaranteed.