Sa’ar pans opposition bill ‘completely politicizing’ selection of Supreme Ct. judges

T. Belman. I am shocked by Sa’ar’s move. I support Likud’s Bill totally. I reject the notion that to have the Knesset pick the Judges rather than the Selection Committee is anti-democratic.  Just the opposite.

If the government is elected by a right wing public, why not allow them to appoint judges who share their view point? Why is that not democratic?

In the US, the government picks the judges subject to Senate approval. It always picks Judges which reflect its views on the constitution. How is what is being proposed any different?

Justice minister vows to torpedo proposal, which he says will ‘eliminate’ the court’s independence; warns a Netanyahu government will endanger Israeli democracy

Today, 

A view of the Supreme Court building in Jerusalem. (Shmuel Bar-Am)

A view of the Supreme Court building in Jerusalem. (Shmuel Bar-Am)

Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar on Monday assailed an opposition bill aimed at reforming the selection process for Supreme Court judges, vowing to torpedo it.

According to the bill — submitted by lawmakers from the Likud, Shas, United Torah Judaism and Religious Zionism parties — Supreme Court judges, including its president and vice president, will be appointed by the government, with final approval given by a vote in the Knesset plenum.

The proposal seeks to replace the current system, which is done through the Judicial Selection Committee, composed of ministers, lawmakers and judges.

A proposal by [David] Amsalem, [Itamar] Ben Gvir and [Yitzhak] Pindrus aimed at eliminating the Supreme Court’s independence and completely politicizing the selection process for judges is set to come up for a vote in two days,” Sa’ar said at a meeting of his New Hope faction in Knesset.

“If, God forbid, a Bibi-Ben Gvir government is formed, the danger to the democratic government in Israel will be clear and immediate. We will work to topple this bill at Wednesday’s vote in the plenum.”

Right-wing politicians have long attacked the court over its composition and its rulings, accusing it of being too liberal, and have called for drastically limiting its powers of judicial oversight.


Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar leads a New Hope faction meeting at the Knesset on June 6, 2022. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly attacked the justice system during his ongoing corruption trial.

Sa’ar himself has advocated for further forms within the justice system, including televised public hearings for Supreme Court candidates and splitting the role of the attorney general into two positions.

June 14, 2022 | 1 Comment »

Leave a Reply

1 Comment / 1 Comment

  1. @Ted

    I quite agree. Sa’ar’s position here is as inexplicably false as his decision to deny the public’s choice of a Right wing govt, while empowering the Left, Meretz and Abbas by plying them with bribes among which he included stately funding to the Arabs and Negev lands to the Bedouin. This latest example of his solidly toxic input into the body politic, further demonstrates his lack of fidelity to the principles for which he claims to hold any ideological support.

    By keeping the choice of judicial appointments from being solely due to the choice of elected members of the Knessett, Sa’ar is acting to prevent the input of the public during an election from having any bearing upon the choice of the arbiters of judicial review. Such political shell games, as are currently in place, remove the full weight of responsibility from the Knesset members and thereby leave the public with the most marginal of input into the content of the judges chosen.

    Furthermore, the use of lawmakers and judges to choose the Supreme Court Judges does seem a somewhat incestuous process, which does appear to be the focus of not reforming the system to include the potential of public scrutiny of the selection of these judges. This current model of selection leverages the input of the legal class over that of the public, and thereby provides a complete lack of an equitable public response to the judges chosen having an ideology inconsistent with that of the voting public. Such an excision of public input into the most significant and awesome organization as the Supreme Court would be seen as being a mark of arbitrary power placed by unelected lawyers into the hands of other unelected lawyers, quite an inbred scenario in which corruption might find a florid bed in which to comfortably rest.

    As you suggest, the political protection afforded by this current system is inconsistent with the most basic tenets of democracy. Keeping the public from having a definitive input in this process, even an indirect say through the election process of the parties making the selections, is a clear mark of tyranny and should be reformed to gain the consent of the governed in the selection process.

    Is it a remarkable coincidence that Sa’ar who prevented the formation of the Right wing govt for which the public voted, would also be responsible for continuing the process of Judicial selection bearing little to no input from the public as well. Something to think about when contemplating Sa’ar and his various motivations, particularly given the legal abuses that have been taken by the legal community in fomenting a rolling lawfare coup upon a sitting PM, which was, and continues to be, fully supported by Sa’ar, as well.