Department of Policy Planning and Strategy

The Division serves as a comprehensive staff unit and assists the Minister and the CEO in formulating long-term strategy and policy, as well as work programs in the Ministry of Justice in planning, monitoring and execution aspects.

The Policy and Strategy Planning Division of the Ministry of Justice was established in May 2014 following Government Decision No. 4085 dated September 14, 2008 and as part of a government-wide move to establish planning and strategy units in government ministries to strengthen government governance, planning and execution.
 

The Division's mission 

The Policy Planning and Strategy Division will initiate and lead strategic processes, and will serve as a model for institutionalizing an organizational culture of excellence in management and professional work in order to enable the Ministry of Justice to realize its mission and objectives.
 

The Division's roles

• Assist the Minister, the General Administration and the Ministry's senior management shape and advance medium and long-term policy.
• Conduct an annual strategic assessment, analyze the implications, and formulate targets and objectives and steps to realize the Ministry's objectives.
• Formulate an annual work plan in the Ministry and its units based on the Ministry's targets and objectives, and track and control the plan's implementation on a current basis.
• Synchronize the work plans of the Ministry's units, formulate a recommendation regarding priorities, and align the work plans with the Ministry budget.
• Incorporate top-level administrative work in issues on the Ministry's agenda. 
• Preside over regulatory improvements and Regulatory Impact Assessments (RIA).
• Plan and oversee Ministerial and units' strategies (across-the-board and in-depth).
• Create the research framework for data-based decision-making in shaping policy and strategic planning in the Ministry of Justice and all its units.
• Consolidate methodical and reliable studies in the Ministry and make them accessible to parties in the Ministry, in the Government and to the general public.
• Spearhead the imparting of policy, procedures and appropriate tools for knowledge management.
• Establish collaborations of all kinds in the work of the Ministry's units. (Collaborations within the Ministry, between Ministries, between sectors: civil society and the business sector, academia and experts, local authorities and the general public). 
• Develop processes that support and encourage innovation in the Ministry's work. 
• Formulate the Ministry's digital strategy (in collaboration with the Digital and Information Technologies Department), build tools to realize the strategy, and lead projects in this area.
• Represent the Ministry in professional Ministerial, inter-Ministerial and inter-sectoral teams

Officials

• Eldad Canetti – VP Policy Planning and Strategy Division.
• Zemer Blondheim – Director of the Policy and Strategy Division.
• Avigail Zerbib – Senior Head of Interface, Law and Strategy Sector.
• Inbal Galon – Director of Research Department.
• Eran Banai – Director of Work Programs.
• Galia Sagi Rotstein – Director of Regulation Policy.
• Maisa Zoubi – Director of Knowledge and Information Management.
   

Improvement and Regulations

Regulation is a central tool of the State for safeguarding public interests and promoting the economy and society by establishing binding rules of conduct in a way that is commensurate with the values of the State and which creates an infrastructure for sustainable growth and for an egalitarian and healthy society.

The government is responsible for ensuring that regulation reflects a proper balance between intervention in the economy and the creation and preservation of an expanse of free operation of citizens and businesses. Unbalanced regulation may impose on the economy costs that are not necessary for the protection of the public interest, or, in other words – an excessive regulatory burden.

Since government regulation is a complex system, conscious and deliberate effort is required in order to maintain the proper balance. To this end, Government Decision No. 2118 of October 22, 2014 was adopted, regarding the reduction of the regulatory burden. The decision establishes two mechanisms in order to strengthen the balance between the purpose of regulation and its costs and reduce the burden involved.
 

1. The first mechanism is the improvement of the existing regulation, a five-year process designed to examine how the burden of regulation can be reduced in light of the public interest, when each year, various regulatory units in the Ministry undergo the process. The premise of the process is that in hindsight bureaucratic processes and regulatory requirements can be identified, which can be re-examined and facilitated while protecting the public interest. The improvement of regulation is carried out through a methodology that includes dialogue with stakeholders and representative organizations, which is channeled to the creation of a work plan for improving regulation that includes measures to reduce the excessive regulatory burden.
2. The second mechanism is the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) process, which is designed to ensure that when creating new regulation, the regulator will consider a series of considerations in a manner that will ensure a balance between the purpose of regulation – the public interest which the regulator is responsible for, and the regulatory costs and without harming additional public interests.
    

What is an RIA report?

An RIA report is designed to provide a summary view of the regulatory impact assessment process, and is attached to any government bill or government regulations draft that apply regulation, as defined in the government's decision. The report opens with a presentation of the purpose of the regulation and background, defines the existing situation and the existing problems that require change. The report then describes the possible alternatives for solving the problem, and describes the process of deciding between them, aimed at finding the optimal alternative, after examining the advantages and disadvantages of the various alternatives in comparison to the existing situation. Furthermore, the report describes the discourse that took place with the public on the subject and the methodology adopted in the work process.