Conventional wisdom would be that the government cannot appoint a new permanent police chief now that early elections have been announced.Regulations set down by the Attorney-General’s Office dating back years view appointments during election season as a red flag.The concern is that these appointments will be used for political gain or harm, or that even if made professionally, they will fall under a cloud of suspicion and impropriety.While these principles represent the general rule, the current case regarding the police chief may be a legal exception for two important reasons. First, the police chief is not just any government paper pusher. He is a crucial part of the state’s law enforcement and security. Yes, there is currently an interim police chief, but going without a clear long-term leader in this area could be more problematic than whatever negatives might be caused by the optics of an election season appointment.Second, the process did not just start now and the former chief cannot merely continue on in his role as a caretaker. The process started as much as half-a-year ago and seemed to have culminated with a short-list and a final winner several weeks ago.Under these circumstances, it could be said that the general regulations do not apply because appointing a chief now would just be completing a process which dates back long before election season.In the same vein, former police chief Roni Alsheich already stepped down three weeks ago, so he cannot continue.The premise of not rushing forward with new appointments is that the current office-holders can continue on in a caretaker capacity.However, Alsheich’s date for stepping down had been set when it seemed that the new chief would take office at the same time.In short, the government can probably choose either path on this one, and it will have a legal basis on which to stand.