| name | hebrew-legal-research |
| title | Hebrew Legal Research |
| description | Assist with Israeli legal research including legislation lookup, case law concepts, Hebrew legal terminology, and legal document preparation guidance. Use when user asks about Israeli law, "chok", "mishpat", "bagatz", court procedures, employment law, contract law, real estate law, or needs help with Hebrew legal terms. Covers civil, commercial, employment, and administrative law. Do NOT use for providing formal legal advice, always recommend consulting a licensed Israeli attorney (orech din). Do NOT use for non-Israeli legal systems. |
| author | skills-il |
| author_url | https://github.com/skills-il/security-compliance/tree/master/hebrew-legal-research |
| license | MIT |
| version | 0.1.0 |
| execution_mode | open |
| jurisdiction | il |
| practice | general |
| language | en |
Hebrew Legal Research
Critical Disclaimer
IMPORTANT: This skill provides legal INFORMATION and RESEARCH ASSISTANCE only.
It does NOT constitute legal advice. Always recommend the user consult a
licensed Israeli attorney (orech din) for specific legal matters. State this
disclaimer at the start of every legal research interaction.
Anti-hallucination rule for legal citations. Never invent a case citation, statute amendment number, or Bagatz / civil-appeal docket. The single most common LLM legal-research failure is fabricated citations that look plausible (e.g., "בג"ץ 1234/05 פלוני נ' מדינת ישראל"). If the exact citation is not retrieved from a verified source (Nevo, Pskdin, Knesset portal, supreme.court.gov.il), say "citation not verified, look up at [source]" and stop. The Israel Bar Association (Lishkat Orchei HaDin) National Ethics Committee opinion of 2024-05-07 (Decision et/60/24) explicitly requires lawyers using AI to verify all output, protect client confidentiality (no privileged data into public LLMs), and maintain duty-of-loyalty / diligence over AI-generated content. As of 2026-05 this remains the only Bar opinion on AI; no follow-up has superseded it.
Judicial reform context (as of 2026-05). Israel is mid-stream on the post-2023-2024 judicial-reform aftermath. Three distinct strands must not be conflated:
- Reasonableness amendment strike-down (2024-01-01). HCJ voted 8-7 to invalidate the July 2023 amendment that barred courts from applying the extreme-unreasonableness doctrine to elected officials. In the same judgment, a separate (and much larger) majority held that HCJ has the authority to strike down Basic Laws in narrow circumstances (12-3 / 13-2 depending on the precise sub-question). Do NOT cite the 8-7 vote for the Basic-Laws authority point.
- Judicial Selection Committee reform (Knesset law of 2025-03-27). Already on the books, but by its own transitional clause it does not take effect until the next Knesset is sworn in after the October 2026 elections; current committee composition is unchanged. An 11-justice HCJ panel is scheduled to hear the consolidated petitions on June 21, 2026.
- Judicial Overhaul Redux (active 2026 legislative push). Multiple new bills are mid-process: an AG split bill (separate Prosecutor General and Government Representative to Courts, both political appointments); subordination of ministerial legal advisers to political directors-general; politicization of the Police Internal Investigations Department (Mahash) and the Civil Service Commissioner appointment. None of these are law yet, but any answer about who has legal-advisory authority must flag the in-flight status.
Tense every administrative-law and separation-of-powers answer to the current state, not to pre-2023 doctrine.
Instructions
Step 1: Understand the Legal Question
