Controversial MK immunity bill pulled from Knesset agenda amid criticism

Gotliv’s bill would block any investigation from opening in the first place unless a 90-MK supermajority approves it, except for corruption-related charges.

By ELIAV BREUER NOVEMBER 27, 2024 15:50

MK Tally Gotliv arrives for a court hearing at the High Court of Justice in Jerusalem on June 2, 2024 (photo credit: Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

Israel’s governing coalition removed from the Knesset’s agenda at the last minute on Wednesday a preliminary vote on a controversial bill proposal by Likud MK Tally Gotliv to increase the level of immunity of Members of the Knesset from criminal or civilian charges.

Current Israeli law dictates that MKs are immune from acts or statements made as part of their public service. However, law enforcement officials may open criminal investigations against Members of the Knesset and may also indict MKs if approved by the Attorney-General. If indicted, MKs may then request that the Knesset award them immunity from standing trial.

Gotliv’s bill would block any investigation from opening in the first place unless a 90-MK supermajority approves it, except for corruption-related charges, which law enforcement would be able to investigate without prior approval.

According to the bill’s preamble, “The court has no means to intervene, assess, or determine the scope of a Knesset member's duties or what is done in the fulfillment of those duties. It is not the court's role, nor does it have the tools, to decide on the extent of a Knesset member's functions. In light of the numerous lawsuits currently filed against Knesset members in an attempt to silence them, and in view of the court rulings discussing the issue of immunity and seeking to diminish its power and importance, this amendment is proposed to clarify the essential importance of immunity for the work of Knesset members.”

Gotliv proposed the bill after civilian charges were filed against her by protest leader Shikma Bressler, after she revealed in the Knesset that Bressler’s husband worked for the Shin Bet and accused him of playing a part in the October 7 Hamas massacre as part of an attempt to bring down the government.

Inside the Knesset building. (credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)

The Knesset’s Legal Advisor, Sagit Afik, demanded that Gotliv announce her conflict of interest before presenting the bill. Gotliv did so and pledged on the Knesset dais that the bill’s wording would be changed so that it does not apply to ongoing investigations.

Proposed MK immunity bill allegedly undermines rule of law

She then justified the proposal by arguing that MKs had the right even to commit criminal acts if they believed them to be critical to their roles as MKs. She defended her comments on Bressler’s husband and gave as other examples an alleged leak of classified information from the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee by Democrats MK Gilad Kariv and participation in roadblocks as part of a protest against the government by Democrats MK Naama Lazimi.

MKs from the opposition attacked Gotliv and the coalition for even considering the bill, arguing that it would enable widespread criminal activity by MKs without law enforcement being able to intervene.

The Knesset did not hold the preliminary vote on the bill after parts of the coalition, including members of the United Right party, expressed reservations.

The attorney general’s office wrote in a legal opinion on Sunday that the bill proposal “gives almost decisive weight to the freedom of action of Knesset members while pushing aside significant considerations of equality before the law and the principle of the rule of law. Shifting the balances so fundamentally grants Knesset members significant privileges in criminal or civil proceedings brought against them, which run counter to the purposes underlying the institution of immunity.”

---

---

“The proposed arrangement will effectively prevent the investigation and prosecution of Knesset members and the possibility of filing civil lawsuits against them in a wide range of cases and will also lead to the disruption of investigative procedures. Thus, the bill turns the institution of immunity into a kind of ‘city of refuge’ for Knesset members. As far as we know, even in comparative terms, this is an unusual and extensive arrangement,” the attorney general’s office wrote.

“Preventing the enforcement of the law—both criminal, from the investigation stage, and civil—by a mechanism that will, in practice, also apply to cases unrelated to the parliamentary role of Knesset members essentially creates an unjustified privileged class. This proposed arrangement undermines the fundamental principles of equality before the law, the rule of law, and public trust in the governing system and its elected officials,” the AG’s office wrote.

”The high and exceptional threshold proposed for Knesset approval—90 Knesset members—also raises the concern of majority tyranny in the Knesset towards the minority, so that law enforcement would be feasible only against the political minority in the Knesset,” the AG wrote.