Supreme Court head rejects Levin plan to make conservative judge chief justice for a year
Acting Court President Vogelman slams justice minister’s proposal, accuses him of ‘harming the proper functioning of the justice system’ during a time of crisis
Amid the ongoing deadlock over the appointment of a Supreme Court president, Justice Minister Yariv Levin proposed to the court Monday that he appoint conservative justice Yosef Elron as president for a single year, after which liberal justice Isaac Amit would get the role. The offer was summarily rejected by Acting Court President Justice Uzi Vogelman.
For nearly a year now, Levin has blocked the accession of Amit, who should have been appointed upon the retirement of former president Esther Hayut, based on the longstanding seniority-based system. (Vogelman is more senior than Amit, which is why he is now the acting president, but had waved away the appointment in the past, as he is set to retire in October of this year and would thus have had only a year in the post.)
The minister opposes the liberal Amit and has long sought to increase governmental influence over the court, including as part of his now-frozen judicial overhaul plan, which sharply divided Israeli society throughout 2023 until Hamas’s October 7 invasion and massacre and the outbreak of war in Gaza.
Levin made the offer as he faces petitions to the court, in its role as the High Court of Justice, over his refusal to convene the Judicial Selection Committee to vote on the appointment of a new chief justice. Levin would lose such a vote, with a majority on the committee backing Amit based on seniority.
Earlier this month, the court gave Levin until Monday to break the impasse over appointing a permanent president for the court.
Noting that Levin has also refused to hold regular work meetings with him since June, and arguing that this was preventing the advancement of numerous pressing matters that stand before the court, Vogelman wrote: “During these difficult and trying times for the country and its citizenry, [your] conduct is harming the proper functioning of the justice system.”
All Supreme Court justices are mandated to retire at age 70. Levin’s proposal, which he termed a “compromise offer,” would see Elron serve as chief justice until September 2025, when he is set to retire. Elron would be followed by an incumbent High Court justice picked by the judiciary’s representatives on the Judicial Selection Committee, presumably Amit. The two appointments would be made simultaneously.
In addition, Levin’s offer would see the deadlocked committee appoint three new justices to the 15-member court: one favored by the government and Knesset representatives on the committee; one favored by the judiciary’s representatives; and a consensus candidate, to be selected from the district courts.
Vogelman slammed Levin’s offer, saying that the seniority method, which would see Amit promoted, is meant to “protect judicial independence and prevent politicization of the High Court justices and chief justices.”
“In this sense, an offer based on nullifying the seniority method does not represent any progress,” said Vogelman. “Moreover,” he said, the simultaneous appointment of two chief justices “raises serious legal difficulties.”
Notably, if no agreement is reached by the time of Vogelman’s retirement in October, Amit will automatically become acting court president.
The High Court in July ordered Levin and the Judicial Selection Committee to work out a compromise, in the wake of the justice minister’s refusal to bring the appointment of a new chief justice to a vote in the committee.
Presenting his “fair offer,” Levin wrote to Vogelman that the “difficult and challenging days” Israel is facing “behoove us all to make a supreme effort to reach agreements.
“I emphasize that it’s not easy for me to make this offer, but I think it is necessary to reach agreement,” wrote Levin.
Vogelman responded that “despite appearing to be an equitable proposal,” Levin’s offer to appoint three new justices “effectively harms the equality between [Judicial Selection] Committee members, and makes redundant some of its members’ votes.”
The seniority method, Vogelman wrote to Levin, “has proven itself since the state’s founding, and you are aware that our position is” that it should be upheld.
Under the seniority method, which is customary but not codified, the Judicial Selection Committee chooses the longest-serving High Court judge to serve as chief justice.
The committee includes two lawmakers — one from the coalition, one from the opposition — and two ministers, including the justice minister, as well as three High Court justices and two representatives of the Israeli Bar Association.
Appointments to the High Court require a supermajority of seven of the committee’s nine members, making it impossible for the justice system’s five members to choose a High Court judge without recourse to the politicians.
Supporters of the seniority method say it prevents promotion-seeking justices from paying fealty to politicians.
Levin, who set forth a plan to overhaul the judiciary in early 2023 — radically constricting its independence and capacity to intervene in legislation and government decisions — sought to overturn the seniority method, echoing rightwing politicians’ argument that it bolsters an entrenched judiciary that is biased against them.
Israel’s chief justice picks the judges who preside over High Court cases and the members of state committees of inquiry, potentially giving the next chief justice outsize influence over an expected official probe into the failures that enabled Hamas’s October 7 attack and the ongoing corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The premier has said he opposes an inquiry into the attack until the fighting ends. Critics accuse him of delaying the matter for fear an investigation will reflect poorly upon his conduct in the lead-up to the disaster.
Jeremy Sharon contributed to this report.
