Levin convenes judicial selection panel but again stalls vote on Supreme Court chief

A long-delayed meeting of the Judicial Selection Committee Thursday ended without a vote to elect a permanent president of the Supreme Court after Justice Minister Yariv Levin spent the session discussing technical matters relating to the vote but did not call it.

Levin, who as justice minister chairs the panel, has stalled on convening the committee and calling a vote to elect a Supreme Court president for more than a year since the previous president, Esther Hayut, retired in October 2023. His actions Thursday appeared to be in violation of a ruling by the Supreme Court’s High Court of Justice that a new president must be selected immediately.

Following the meeting, The Movement for Quality Government filed a petition against Levin for contempt of court for violating its ruling.

Instead of voting, Levin used much of the meeting to urge greater transparency in the voting process and called for future meetings to be broadcast live so that “the public can judge how justices are appointed in Israel.”

“There are parties who are trying to hide the process and people who are trying to block public discussion about the candidates’ suitability for the position,” he argued. “It’s not too late to stop, abandon your orders, and return to the path of agreement.”

Levin had previously requested that Thursday’s meeting be live-streamed, but was unable to secure approval.

Media outlets including Haaretz and Channel 13 reported that Levin had sought to bring to a vote on Thursday the appointment of conservative Justice Noam Sohlberg as deputy president. The move was apparently designed to make Sohlberg the acting president in place of Isaac Amit in the absence of a permanent appointment, but was seemingly shot down by other committee members, and the matter was not brought to a vote.

Following the meeting, opposition committee member MK Karine Elharrar (Yesh Atid) mocked Levin’s demand for transparency.

“Minister Levin has once again chosen not to fulfill his duty to appoint a president of the Supreme Court, and is inciting the public debate through unnecessary provocation,” she said. “The choice to waste time and use an entire meeting solely to demand that the committee meeting be broadcast is a smokescreen and a diversion in order to continue his efforts to change the regime and destroy the status of the judicial system.”

Levin, the hawkish Likud member who led the government’s stalled judicial overhaul effort, is looking to steer the court in a more conservative direction and prevent the election of liberal Justice Isaac Amit, who stands to win the majority on the committee.

Amit is currently the acting president, and is expected to become the permanent president under the longstanding seniority system, which Levin seeks to upend, by which the justice with the most years on the court is elected the next president.

Levin argues that the seniority system is merely a tradition and not legally binding. He prefers hardline conservative Justice Yosef Elron for the position, and has spent the past 13 months trying to prevent Amit’s selection.

After Thursday’s meeting, Eliad Shraga, Chairman of the Movement for Quality Government, charged that Levin should be charged with contempt of court.

“We are witnessing unprecedented conduct by the justice minister, who consciously chooses and intends to violate an explicit ruling of the Supreme Court,” Shraga wrote. “This is a serious violation of the rule of law and the principle of separation of powers.”

Thursday’s meeting was the latest battle in an ongoing war Levin has been waging against the court.

In September, after months of delays, the High Court ruled that Levin must convene the Judicial Selection Committee and elect a new president for the Supreme Court as quickly as possible.

In an apparent bid to spite the High Court’s ruling, Levin responded by nominating all 12 sitting justices for chief justice, hoping to delay the nomination process by opening each candidate up to public debate. The move was widely condemned, and was nixed after 10 of the justices responded that they did not wish to be considered candidates, leaving just Amit and Elron.

Earlier this month, Levin conceded to the High Court and set Thursday, November 28 as the date to convene the Judicial Selection Committee and conclude the appointment process.

However, several days before the meeting, Levin announced that he did not actually intend to hold Thursday’s scheduled vote.

In a letter sent to members of the Judicial Selection Committee, Elron defended his decision to run for the presidency. Despite the advantages of the seniority system, he argued he should be chosen over Amit due to his professional experience and his plans for improving the legal system.

“I have never done anything to promote my candidacy for the position,” Elron wrote. “I have never discussed any issue with the justice minister and have never sought the support of any politician in connection with the appointment. My legal outlook demands the separation of justice from politics.”