Knesset adviser: Giving Bennett defense portfolio violates basic law

Basic Law: Government states that during an interim government, an MK can be appointed to a ministerial post without a vote from the Knesset if a minister stopped serving in that post.

By JERUSALEM POST STAFF
Naftali Bennet at coalition meeting, March 11, 2018 (photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM/THE JERUSALEM POST)
Naftali Bennet at coalition meeting, March 11, 2018
(photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM/THE JERUSALEM POST)
Naftali Bennett can remain defense minister even though his appointment to the position was not authorized by the Knesset, the legislature’s legal adviser Eyal Yinon told the High Court of Justice on Monday.
Yinon responded to a petition to the court, saying that Bennett’s appointment should have been brought to a vote in the Knesset, but it can stay in place because the vote was skipped due to a flawed interpretation of the law, Globes reported.
Basic Law: Government states that during an interim government, an MK can be appointed to a ministerial post without a vote from the Knesset if a minister stopped serving in that post.
However, Bennett’s appointment was not because of a minister resigning or being fired; rather, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave the portfolio that he held to Bennett.
Yinon wrote that the law “expresses the idea that when a minister leaves the government there is a functional vacuum that must be filled, and therefore, it is justified in this case to deviate from the principle...that appointing ministers requires the Knesset’s authorization.
“However, our stance is that the Basic Law does not make an exception for the appointment of all ministers during an interim government,” he explained.
Still, Yinon said the High Court should not accept the petition or instruct that Bennett’s appointment be canceled, and that his interpretation of the law should be applied from now on.
His reasoning was that Bennett’s appointment without a vote was based on Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit’s understanding of the law, and because there have not been any court rulings on the matter.