Levin calls current system for picking judges ‘distorted’ and ‘absurd’
Comments made as Knesset gears up for 2nd vote to choose representatives to sit on panel; with broader staffing in flux, committee won’t meet in July
Carrie Keller-Lynn is a former political and legal correspondent for The Times of Israel
Justice Minister Yariv Levin attacked the current method for appointing judges as “distorted” and “absurd” on Wednesday, hinting that he will not convene the Judicial Selection Committee before the coalition retools the process.
Radically altering the committee’s makeup, in order to exert greater political control, is a central element of Levin’s plan to drastically reduce judicial checks on political power.
Speaking in the Knesset, the justice minister called the committee’s composition “distorted,” alleging that it enshrines liberal interests without reflecting the political orientation of the government.
“This is an absurd situation, unacceptable, and in need of correction,” he said.
Levin’s comments came amid steady parliamentary opposition pressure on him to convene the panel, hours before a Knesset vote to advance a bill that would alter its composition, and one week before the Knesset holds its second election to staff lawmakers to the committee.
The first election, held on June 14, exacerbated the political crisis by only selecting one of the two required lawmakers to sit on the panel.
Yesh Atid MK Karine Elharrar was elected after the coalition tried to spoil the vote in response to rebellion from within its own camp. Opposition parties cried foul after a coalition representative was not elected, accusing the coalition of pulling a trick to delay convening the committee.
Opposition parties Yesh Atid and National Unity then froze their participation in talks aimed at reaching a compromise on judicial reform, saying they would not agree to negotiate so long as the committee remained unable to convene and carry out its duties.
In response, the coalition quickly moved forward with unilaterally legislating to curtail judicial review of politicians’ decisions for their “reasonableness,” with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu confirming that the coalition will remake the process for appointing judges during the Knesset’s winter session.
“Unfortunately, the opposition factions decided to withdraw from talks, thereby torpedoing them,” Levin said.
“Under these circumstances,” he continued, referring to the end of compromise talks, “an amendment is required regarding the committee, and in the end, I hope, this will also be carried out.”
Lawmakers hold two of the panel’s nine spots, and next week’s do-over election will choose the second representative, likely far-right Otzma Yehudit MK Yitzhak Kroizer.
Given up to 30 days by law to hold a fresh vote for Knesset representatives to the current panel, the coalition stretched the election to its deadline, despite Kroizer’s election being in line with promises made to Otzma Yehudit during talks to form a coalition last year.
Ahead of Wednesday’s end-of-day deadline to nominate candidates, opposition parties submitted the names of Yesh Atid lawmakers alongside Kroizer to ensure the July 12 election produces a result, and the Knesset will no longer be a bottleneck to convening the panel.
Opposition sources have explained that they do not trust the coalition to elect their representative next week, and by running candidates, they hope to force the coalition to vote in July 12’s secret ballot and not further delay the process.
Religious Zionism MK Moshe Solomon also submitted his nomination, according to the Knesset presidium.
However, Kroizer’s election is not the committee’s only stumbling block.
Levin must still appoint a second minister to join him on the nine-member panel — by law, one of the government’s six female cabinet members. He has yet to declare a choice.
The Supreme Court must also choose two justices to join Court President Esther Hayut on the panel.
Levin’s runway for responding to opposition demands to immediately staff and convene the committee might be further extended, however. The Israel Bar Association’s National Council will only select the bar’s two representatives to the committee on July 31, meaning the committee cannot convene this month.
“The Judicial Selection Committee could not convene, even if I wanted it to be completed,” Levin told the Knesset plenum.
The Knesset later on Wednesday advanced a bill to strip the Bar Association of much of its power, and potentially its seats on the Judicial Selection Committee.
Although bill sponsor Likud MK Hanoch Milwidsky told the plenum that the bill would not axe Bar Association representation on the upcoming Judicial Selection Committee, the version advanced on Wednesday includes a provision to deprive the bar of its seats.
Levin also claimed that if staffed and convened, the six non-coalition members on the Judicial Selection Committee would push to overpower the coalition’s three representatives, charging that the opposition’s one representative would band together with judges and Bar Association members to “work as one, compared to only three from the coalition that won a majority in the elections.”
A supermajority of seven panel members is required to name Supreme Court justices, but only a simple majority of five panel members is required to appoint lower court judges.
Levin said that, even when there is a political change of guard from the left- to the right-wing, the structure of the Judicial Selection Committee “remains stable and constant,” repeating his longstanding argument that the committee’s professional representatives support “left-wing” judge candidates.
Levin has in the past called the committee “invalid” for a democracy and behind closed doors, has threatened to not convene it at all in its current form.
Saying he thinks its composition is “not correct,” Levin added that the nine-member blended political and professional panel has “a composition that has no parallel in the world – not in terms of the internal division of power between the elected echelon and what was supposed to be a professional echelon, and long ago became the echelon whose political positions are known and clear.”
Levin and supporters of the coalition’s broader plan to overhaul the judiciary say that right-wing policies have been blocked by a court they view as overly liberal and intrusive, and claim that more political influence over the appointments process will diversify representation.
Detractors say that increasing political influence over court picks would threaten judicial independence.
