Justice minister under criticism because he threatens Supreme Court’s leftist hegemony
Shaul Rosenfeld
[..] When we see former Deputy Chief Justice Mishael Cheshin becoming jealous of the Saudis and threatening to cut off the arm of the justice minister, and when the Supreme Court’s guardians argue that soon enough we’ll have to mourn the premature death of the judicial and ideological apple of their eyes – it means that for them all hope has apparently been lost, and therefore they have no choice but to declare an all-out war against he who threatens to destroy the “judicial temple.”
But why is the judicial guard so furious? In fact, an objective examination of most of Friedmann’s moves so far makes it appear that alongside minor reforms, which are very far from shaking up the system, he indeed worked to advance several fundamental and highly important initiatives, although most of them are still at nascent stages.
Annulling the seniority-based system for appointing chief justices, the seven-year limit on their term in office (the only reform so far that passed all legislation phases,) and the “privatization” of some of the State Prosecutor’s Office’s legal services, among others, are not reforms that constitute fundamental changes.
However, initiating legislation that would limit the High Court’s constitutional authority to disqualify laws, the renewed legislation of the Intifada Law annulled by the High Court, or initiating laws that would entrench judicial limits and curb the right to appear before the High Court – these initiatives do constitute an attempt to introduce substantial structural change.
[..] Of course, those horrified that this hegemony will be lost forever are not only High Court sympathizers from the academia and legal world, but also many members of a very certain political camp who realize that the High Court’s ability to support their ideological positions may be seriously undermined.
Jewish sages have said that when a person commits an offense and repeats it, he feels it has become permissible. And so, the ongoing takeover of powers has become permissible in the eyes of our judges, while it slowly boils over to moral issues and trickles down to Knesset and government decisions – and so, a broad legal estate is created able to address and support many of the ideological notions judges hold dear.CONTINUE
