The rancorous clash between the judiciary and Justice Minister Yariv Levin continued on Tuesday, as all Supreme Court justices other than Isaac Amit and Yosef Elron informed the Judicial Selection Committee that they wish to have their candidacies for Supreme Court president retracted, after Justice Minister Yariv Levin nominated them without their consent for the post earlier this week.
The spat escalated even further after Levin said their retractions were not valid and accused “the heads” of the judicial system of using “illegitimate means” and “interference” in the selection process. This was followed by a trenchant rejection from the Judicial Authority, saying that such accusations were “baseless.”
Levin nominated all 12 serving justices as an act of defiance against the Supreme Court, which, in its capacity as High Court of Justice, had ordered him earlier this month to call a vote for a new Supreme Court president.
The justice minister had refused to hold such a vote for the past 11 months, owing to his desire to appoint Elron, a hardline conservative, despite having no majority on the committee.
Shortly after the justices filed their requests to retract their enforced candidacies, “a source close to Levin” said that the minister rejected their effort and insisted that the law does not allow them to do so.
Get The Times of Israel’s Daily Edition
by email and never miss our top stories
By signing up, you agree to the terms
The 1984 Courts Law, and the regulations and procedures for that law, do not actually state whether a candidate is entitled to withdraw their candidacy, although it does say that those authorized to propose candidates, such as the justice minister, can submit their names to the director of the Judicial Selection Committee.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin (right) attends a swearing-in ceremony for newly appointed judges along with Supreme Court Acting President Uzi Vogelman, at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem, on June 23, 2024. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)
The Movement for Quality Government in Israel, which filed the High Court petition against Levin’s refusal to appoint a court president, pointed out that the 1984 law stipulates explicitly that after the justice minister, who chairs the committee, convenes the panel to make an appointment, it is the committee itself that determines the hearings and work of the forum, not the minister.
And Amit Becher, head of the Israel Bar Association, which has two representatives on the Judicial Selection Committee, similarly rejected Levin’s assertion on the same grounds, adding that it was “clear” it is not possible to force someone to stand for any position.
Clause 7d of the 1984 Courts Law states explicitly after the clauses empowering the justice minister to convene the committee that “the [Judicial Selection] Committee will determine the rest of its hearings schedule and work.”
It is as yet unclear if Levin will be able to force the committee to hold hearings on all 12 justices during the appointment process.
According to the law, such hearings can only take place 45 days after the names of the candidates are formally published by the justice minister — in this instance, after November 6.
Levin has sought to exert greater government control over the judiciary ever since he took office as justice minister at the beginning of the current government.
The judicial overhaul agenda he advanced in 2023 was designed specifically to give the government control of the Judicial Selection Committee and through it all judicial appointments in the country. At the same time, Levin also sought to overturn the seniority system to increase his influence over the Supreme Court, but his legislative program was thwarted first by mass public protest and then the October 7 atrocities and the subsequent war.
A series of recent rulings in the High Court against the government has prompted the justice minister to seek new ways of exerting government influence over the judiciary.
Levin’s gambit of nominating all 12 Supreme Court justices for president appears designed to drag out the appointment of Amit, a liberal whom the justice minister opposes, by having the committee consider and review the candidacy of every serving justice, and then review submissions from the general public opposed to particular candidates.
Amit is in line to become president in accordance with the seniority system, in place since the court was founded, whereby the justice with the most years on the court is elected president, to avoid politicizing the position.
Levin had sought to shoehorn Elron into the position of president, after the justice, in an unprecedented step, submitted his candidacy for the role in August 2023 in a break with the longstanding use of the seniority system.
Since there is a majority on the committee to appoint Amit, Levin refused to call a vote on the president, resulting in the High Court’s ruling that delaying the appointment by 11 months exceeded the boundaries of the justice minister’s discretion over the matter.
Following the submission of the letters to the committee by the justices requesting their candidacies be withdrawn on Tuesday, “a source close to Justice Minister Yariv Levin” said that the law was “very clear” in that it did not allow for justices to retract their candidacies.
“The minister intends to discuss the many objections that have been submitted [by the public] to all the candidates,” the source said in a statement.
Amit Becher, the interim head of the Israel Bar Association and candidate for the organization’s chairmanship, speaks at a protest against the government’s judicial overhaul plans, in Tel Aviv on June 17, 2023. (Avshalom Sassoni/Flash90)
The statement added that “organized pressure” had been exerted on the justices to ask for their nominations to be retracted, which “reeks of severe interference in the election processes.”
Adds the statement, “The minister will not allow the attempt to deny the public the small right that remains to it, to bring to a hearing all the candidates and to hear the reservations and opposition to them.”
Religious Zionism Youth, the youth chapter of the Religious Zionism party, says that it submitted “hundreds of objections to Amit’s appointment on Monday, including complaints about rulings he made regarding “the release of terrorists,” the return of a Palestinian terrorist’s body to his family, and other decisions relating to security matters.
The Judicial Authority called Levin’s claim “baseless” in a statement to the press, adding that “no pressure at all, including organized pressure, was exerted, on any of the justices to retract their candidacy as was claimed… the justices’ letters were sent by them and in an independent manner.”
Becher accused Levin of seeking to “sow chaos,” “humiliate the legal system,” and “thwart the implementation of the High Court’s ruling,” as well as the process for appointing a court president.
“According to the clear wording of the law, it is the Judicial Selection Committee which determines the work program and certainly when the minister is stymieing an order of the court, the committee is entitled to prevent such illegal behavior,” Becher added.
pdcc