Ministers urge revival of judicial overhaul after High Court rules against Levin
Smotrich claims court waging war against democracy; Ben Gvir says decision constitutes conflict of interest; opposition decries threat to rule of law, warns of ‘Jewish wars’
Sam Sokol is the Times of Israel's political correspondent. He was previously a reporter for the Jerusalem Post, Jewish Telegraphic Agency and Haaretz. He is the author of "Putin’s Hybrid War and the Jews"
Coalition lawmakers on Sunday rallied behind Justice Minister Yariv Levin, calling for the relaunch of his frozen judicial overhaul and dismissing a High Court ruling that he must convene the Judicial Selection Committee and elect a new
Far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich tweeted that he was informed of the “disconnected, scandalous and aggressive” ruling after coming out of a discussion on the state budget with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and that “this is exactly the difference between national responsibility and national irresponsibility.”
“While we are waging a war of existence on seven fronts, the court continues to trample democracy and the rule of law,” he continued, arguing that the justices are “unraveling the foundations of society.”
“We support Justice Minister Yariv Levin, who stands on behalf of all of us against the only body in the country that does not recognize the limits of power. The fixes to the legal system are essential for a Jewish and democratic Israel and we will return to them immediately after the war,” he said
In continuation of his judicial overhaul agenda to assert greater governmental control over the judiciary, Levin has refused for months to hold a vote on a new court president owing to his desire to have the strongly conservative Yosef Elron appointed president, or alternatively, have one of two hardline conservative academics appointed to one of the two empty seats on the Supreme Court.
The unanimous decision refuting the justice minister’s claim that, as chairman of the committee, the law gives him unlimited discretion to convene the Judicial Selection Committee, means that Levin’s effort to overturn the decades-old seniority system has been stymied, for the time being.
Levin himself denounced the decision as undemocratic and “invalid,” and said he would boycott the incoming president since the appointment would be “illegal” and “illegitimate.”
Arguing that the unanimous decision constitutes “a serious conflict of interest” by the justices, far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir declared that the only conclusion that can be drawn from the ruling is that “there is an urgent need to restore the legal reform as soon as possible.”
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi decried Israel’s “judicial dictatorship” and called for noncompliance with the ruling.
“The law states that the authority rests with the justice minister. Any attempt to take away this authority from him by force is illegal and must be annulled,” he posted on X.
“The honorable judges will want to break the law, let them do it themselves and not force law-abiding citizens to do it. After all, they can determine in a judgment who the president of the Supreme Court is, who the president of the state is, and who the prime minister is,” he argued, insisting that “it is forbidden to cooperate” with the court.
“This is against the law! Stop the judicial dictatorship,” he added.
MK Simcha Rothman, the chairman of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee and one of the architects of the shelved overhaul, argued that the High Court is acting in violation of the law with its order.
In order “to make sure that the control of the process of appointing judges is in the hands of the public and its elected officials, the law stipulates that the control of the committee’s agenda is in the hands of the justice minister,” he posted on X. “This is the legislative mandate and in a country of law, everyone must obey the law, including the court.”
Meanwhile, opposition figures warned against resuming the overhaul.
Claiming that the push to overhaul the judiciary led to Hamas’s brutal October 7 attack, Opposition Leader Yair Lapid demanded that the justice minister convene the Judicial Selection Committee at once.
“Yariv Levin’s coup d’état led the country to the disaster of October 7. He must convene the committee immediately. Without the rule of law, we will not have a state,” Lapid declared in a statement shortly after the High Court announced its decision.
Former war cabinet minister Benny Gantz demanded that the justice minister either comply or resign.
“The responsibility for not dragging the State of Israel into a constitutional crisis in general, and during times of war in particular, rests with the prime minister and he must make sure that the law is respected and the High Court ruling is followed,” the National Unity party leader stated.
“If [Levin] believes this is the time for wars over the seniority system instead of against Hamas, it indicates that he has poor priorities and that he and the prime minister have learned nothing from the low place we reached on the eve of the war,” he adds — calling on Levin to follow the court’s ruling or “put down the keys and resign.”
Responding to ministers’ calls for a resumption of the overhaul, Yisrael Beytenu chief Avigdor Liberman insisted that the government must not allow itself to become distracted from the war.
“Now is not the time for Jewish wars,” he posted on X, arguing that the government is currently obliged to do only two things: defeat Israel’s enemies and bring home the hostages.
Only after these two goals have been achieved should other issues be advanced, he argued, stating that while the judicial system does need changes, “the only reform that is necessary and has been delayed since the establishment of the state is the establishment of a constitution and the establishment of a constitutional court.”
MK Gideon Sa’ar, leader of the conservative New Hope opposition party, called on Levin to obey a court order.
He posted on X that it is a shame that it became necessary for the High Court of Justice to weigh in on the matter, but “after a year in which the committee chaired by the justice minister refrained from doing so, there is no escaping it,” declaring “the verdict must be respected.”
Sa’ar, who has advocated for judicial reform, but opposed the government’s proposals as going too far, added that tensions between the executive and judiciary are “against the national interest,” especially during a time of war.
The government’s plan sought to shift power away from the courts and attorney general, diluting the judiciary’s role as a check on government power.
The effort was largely put on hold following Hamas’s October 7 attack, but many believe the government could revive the campaign, bringing the ideological rift that rocked Israel through much of 2023 back to the fore, even as war still rages in Gaza and tens of thousands of people remain displaced in the north and south.
