Supreme Court forcing return of judicial reform, says justice minister

Justice Minister Yariv Levin, the architect of the abortive 2023 judicial reform plan, hints at new bid to pass the reform, accusing Supreme Court of running roughshod over Knesset’s and government’s rights.

By David Rosenberg, World Israel News

The Israeli government and the country’s Supreme Court may be on a collision course that could result in another attempt to reform the judiciary and restore the balance of power among the three branches of government, Justice Minister Yariv Levin (Likud) said Saturday night.

More than a year after the war in Gaza forced the government’s judicial reform plan off the agenda, and a year and a half since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu froze efforts to move forward with the reform in the face of large-scale protests, Levin suggested over the weekend that Israel’s Supreme Court may force the coalition to revive his shelved reform plan.

On Saturday night, Levin published a lengthy Facebook post accusing the Supreme Court of running roughshod over the rights of the country’s legislative and executive branches.

Levin and the High Court have clashed for over a year over the appointment of new justices as well as the naming of a new chief justice for the Supreme Court.

Under Israeli law, the judicial appointment committee – responsible for appointing judges at all levels of the judiciary – is made up of nine voting members, of whom four come from the Knesset and the government (including the justice minister), along with three sitting Supreme Court justices (including the chief justice) and two members of the Israel Bar Association.

While most appointments require only a simple majority of five out of nine members, appointments to the High Court require a supermajority of seven, including at least some level of support from both the Supreme Court’s delegation and the governing coalition, which controls at least three seats on the committee.

Since 2023, the court and the government have remained deadlocked over the appointment of three new Supreme Court justices and the naming of a new chief justice.

The last chief justice, Esther Hayut, finished her term in October 2023, with no replacement named to fill the position.

Justice Uzi Vogelman declined offers to replace Hayut, given that his remaining term on the court was one year. Vogelman took over Hayut’s duties, however, as acting chief justice for one year, before leaving the court this past October. Since then, Yitzhak Amit has served as acting chief justice.

The court has pushed to formally appoint Amit as Hayut’s successor, citing his seniority on the bench.

The Israeli government, however, has refused to back his appointment, noting that there was no statutory requirement to appoint the most senior justice to head the court.

Amit is widely associated with the court’s liberal wing, raising concerns in Israel’s right-wing government.

As a compromise, Levin has proposed to have the committee appoint conservative-leaning justice Yosef Elron as chief justice for a single year, after which he would be replaced by the court’s choice, likely Amit.

Under the compromise, the government and the court would each nominate two justices, with the committee backing one appointment from each list and the third vacancy to be filled by a female judge acceptable to both sides.

However, Acting Chief Justice Vogelman and his successor, Amit, rejected the proposal while the court moved to strip Levin of his authority as justice minister.

“Immediately after the outbreak of the war, the coalition announced a freeze on all activity related to judicial reform,” Levin wrote. “At the time, I believed it was inappropriate to address contentious issues while the country was engaged in a multi-front war.

“Minutes after I sent my proposal to Judge Vogelman, he rejected it contemptuously without even discussing it. Judge Vogelman was well aware that I was open to discussing the details of the proposal. The current acting chief justice, Judge Yitzhak Amit, also knows this. However, they chose to entrench themselves in their refusal.”

“Several months ago, the Supreme Court, in a panel led by Justice Willner, ruled that my role as Minister of Justice would be in title only,” he continued. “Justice Willner issued an order that effectively stripped me of my statutory authority to determine the agenda of the Judicial Selection Committee, thereby invalidating the consensus-based process that had so far achieved an unprecedented number of appointments.”

The ruling, Levin wrote, “is patently unlawful;” nevertheless, the minister continued to cooperate with the court, he claimed.

Levin noted that the court also took the unprecedented step of striking down an amendment to Israel’s Basic Laws – a proto-constitutional set of documents the Supreme Court has claimed have the status of a de facto constitution.

Since then, the Supreme Court has attempted to force through the appointment of Amit as chief justice.

“The judges and representatives of the Bar Association blocked the broadcasting of the committee’s deliberations, allowing them to appoint Judge Amit behind closed doors, ignoring the many objections and difficult questions raised.

“The Court did not stop there — since the war began, it has deliberated on the conditions of the terrorists who perpetrated the October 7 massacre, on humanitarian aid to Hamas in Gaza, on potentially ordering the state to release the bodies of terrorists while our hostages languish in Hamas tunnels, and on many other issues. This evening, it was revealed that Justice Ruth Ronen even visited Ofer Prison to personally oversee the detention conditions of high-ranking terrorists.”

Given the situation, Levin said, the government is now compelled to return to the judicial reform.

“The Court is leaving the Knesset and the government no choice but to act at this time to restore their powers. They have left us no choice. This cannot continue. We, too, have rights.”

Israeli Supreme CourtJudicial reformYariv Levin