Justice minister: Court that interferes with legislation is undemocratic

Ayelet Shaked defends her efforts to alter the process for selecting judges

By ToI Staff 2 December 2016, 11:46 pm

Edit

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (right) and Supreme Court President Miriam Naor attend the opening event of the new magistrate's court in Beit Shemesh on March 29, 2016. (Photo by Yaakov Lederman/Flash90)

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked has challenged critics who say she is jeopardizing Israeli democracy in her efforts to alter the balance of power between the legislative and executive authorities and the court system.

Speaking at a conference in Zichron Yaakov on Thursday, Shaked said that “a judicial authority that interferes with the products of the legislative and executive authorities when these products were made legally and by law does not act according to the democratic model,” according to an Israel Radio report Friday.

Shaked said Israeli democracy was strong and stable and would not be weakened by “such challenges,” but rather strengthened by them.

“Israeli democracy has been buried many times but it seems the news of its death were premature,” Shaked said.

The challenges Shaked was referring to were likely her initiative to alter the balance between judges and politicians on the Judicial Selection Committee.

A bill by three Yisrael Beytenu MKs that is supported by Shaked would require a mere five-four majority on the nine-member Judicial Selection Committee to appoint a judge, including new Supreme Court justices. Current law stipulates that seven votes are required to confirm the appointment, a fact that gives the three Supreme Court justices on the committee a de facto veto over appointments of new justices.

Supreme Court President Miriam Naor last month wrote a letter to Shaked in which she said the bill to reform the nomination process amounted to placing a “gun on the table” in ongoing negotiations between Naor and Shaked.

The issue is coming to a head as four of the court’s 15 justices are set to reach the mandatory retirement age of 70 in the coming months, freeing up nearly a third of the court’s seats.

Shaked’s comments Thursday were made at a conference attended by some 100 jurists, including all Supreme Court presidents past and present, judges, attorneys from the State Prosecution and other lawyers.

Adiv Sterman contributed to this report.