Report: PM’s chief of staff threatened to weaken judiciary if judge wife not promoted
Haaretz says Tzachi Braverman attempted on multiple occasions to advance his wife’s career, and even bullied judge selection panel members; the couple say claims are utter lies
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Chief of Staff Tzachi Braverman once threatened members of Israel’s Judicial Selection Committee to advance bills to weaken the justice system if his wife, a judge, was not promoted, a report said Thursday.
Braverman and his wife denied the Haaretz news site’s report.
The claims against Braverman are particularly pertinent as he fills a central role in a government that is seeking to curtail the power of the judiciary and to remake the Judicial Selection Committee (JSC) to weaken and potentially nullify judges’ voices on the key panel.
Haaretz said Nava Braverman had attempted on several occasions in recent years to advance from her post at the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court, but that she received poor professional reviews that blocked her from moving to the next echelon — a district court.
Those reviews allegedly found her rulings shallow, lacking in robust legal analysis or in-depth debate, and often overturned in appeals at higher courts.
The newspaper, citing evidence it had seen but offering no further details, reported that in 2019, Tzachi Braverman, then cabinet secretary, pressured right-wing lawmakers on the JSC to vote for promoting his wife despite the objections of professionals, but to no avail.
However, it said that when the committee convened again in November 2020, Braverman once again made efforts on behalf of his wife, and this time two Likud representatives, MKs Miri Regev and Osnat Mark, took Nava Braverman’s side and advocated promoting her. Haaretz noted that Nava Braverman’s brother was an aide to Regev in the past and now publishes a newsletter tied to Likud.
The newspaper said that according to documents it holds, ahead of that meeting, Tzachi Braverman made it known to committee members that he would advance bills to weaken the power of judges on the panel and “take them apart” if his wife was not given the nod. It noted that though his wife was not advanced, Braverman never acted on those alleged threats.
The paper further noted that under the previous government, when her husband was working with the opposition, Nava Braverman made no attempt to seek a promotion, but that she again did so after the current government was formed and her husband was once again in a position of power, now as Netanyahu’s chief of staff. It said Justice Minister Yariv Levin had referred the request onward for review.
In response to the report, Tzachi Braverman called the claims “unfounded lies,” asserting that as cabinet secretary he never advanced or thwarted any bills and “certainly never sought my wife’s promotion.” Referencing a previous 2017 report claiming he had interfered on behalf of his wife, Braverman accused Haaretz of using “recycled lies” and bemoaned the fact that his wife, “a professional and well-regarded judge, must again face lies and defamation due to Haaretz’s ceaseless campaign against the prime minister and his associates.”
A statement on behalf of Nava Braverman said that the allegations were, to the best of her knowledge, “baseless and unfounded. The judge never asked for anyone’s help on the subject of her promotion, certainly not her husband’s, and is not aware of him making any efforts or exerting any pressure relating to the matter.”
Regev and Mark also denied that Tzachi Braverman was in any way involved in the debate over his wife or that they had been pressured by anyone to promote his wife.
The current Netanyahu-led government is seeking to change the makeup of the Judicial Selection Committee as part of its larger effort to overhaul the judiciary. The committee currently consists of nine members: two ministers, two lawmakers, two members of the Israel Bar Association and three Supreme Court justices.
Under the original overhaul plan, the government would have changed the makeup of the panel to gain full political control over judge selection. According to the latest proposal reportedly being considered by the coalition, this will be scrapped and the panel will instead consist of an equal number of representatives for the coalition and opposition — but judges will be removed entirely, nullifying their say on the appointments process.
