Friedmann Gets It. Really.

Once again, the Israeli legal elite is upset with Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann for reminding them that their circle is not the incarnation of a modern Israeli monarchy. Friedmann has proposed a law to revise and split the current duties of the office of attorney-general into two separate positions: legal adviser to the government and chief prosecutor.

For the first time in Israel, the proposed law will restrict the powers of the legal adviser, who has enjoyed an effective veto of executive policy decisions through his own legal interpretation. Ever eager to defend the legal elite's ambition to rule, Attorney General Menahem Mazuz warned that if the government is not forced to abide by the opinion of the legal adviser to the government, no minister will have to abide by the legal opinion of the advisers in his ministry. Well, is this not the point of executive discretion and responsibility? The public elects leaders, not legal advisors, to actually lead, don't we?

In a familiar chorus, Mazuz wailed that the law would cause the whole structure of the rule of law to collapse. No, Menny, due process prevents that. The government will still be sued and the courts will still be called upon to adjudicate the legality of policy on occasion. The key difference is that governmental adversaries will actually have to mount a legal argument. No, Menny, the judiciary does not have the right to neutralize the public's mandate of its elected leaders and representatives.

Government as a clearly-defined service bureaucracy to a democratically empowered - and empowering - public. Friedmann gets it. Mazuz, who is trying to preserve rule by legal fiat, clearly does not.