Junior Conservative Justice Contends for Leadership of Israel’s Supreme Court, Amplifying Tensions in an Already Strained Judiciary

On Wednesday, a lower-ranking conservative justice initiated a campaign to secure the presidency of Israel’s Supreme Court. This marks an extraordinary development that, according to legal scholars, poses yet another threat to the judicial body’s autonomy. This occurs as the far-right administration led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pushes forward with a controversial plan to reform the country’s judiciary.

Traditionally, the committee responsible for choosing the Supreme Court’s president has invariably selected the most senior judge for the role. Judge Yosef Elron’s recent decision to vie for the position, which will be vacated by current president Esther Hayut in October, breaks with this longstanding custom.

Isaac Amit, the justice poised to succeed Hayut based on the seniority principle, is a liberal who has served on the bench for over ten years. Conversely, Elron, who joined the court in 2017 and is its most conservative member, appears to have the support of Justice Minister Yariv Levin, the principal driver behind the disputed judicial reforms.

By disrupting the traditional framework of seniority-based appointments, Elron’s candidacy risks heightening political tensions within the court. This could lead to a situation where justices compete for committee endorsements, undermining their independence, warn legal scholars.

“Observers interpret this as a continuation of the judicial revamping and a significant indication of a shift in the legal system,” said Amir Fuchs, a senior researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute, a think tank based in Jerusalem. “Once the criterion of seniority is eradicated, it becomes evident to all justices that their evaluation will be determined by the ruling coalition, thereby compromising their independence.”

Amichai Cohen, a professor of constitutional law, noted that although Elron’s chances of being elected as court president are slim, his candidacy could intensify divisions between liberal and conservative justices. This comes ahead of two crucial decisions slated for next month, concerning the scope of the court’s authority.

Levin, a close ally of Netanyahu, has been working to alter the composition of the committee responsible for selecting judges, including the president of the Supreme Court, through legislative means. His efforts have been stymied in the parliament, leading him to delay convening the committee.

In the upcoming September session, the court will review petitions opposing Levin’s decision to suspend committee meetings. Simultaneously, the court will consider challenges to the initial phase of the judicial reform, which was enacted by Netanyahu’s government in July.

Advocates of the far-right, ultra-Orthodox coalition led by Netanyahu argue that the reform is necessary to curtail the influence of liberal, non-elected judges over elected officials. They also contend that the court should not have the power to invalidate legislation that restricts its own authority.

The judicial overhaul has sparked widespread protests that have persisted for several months. Should the court nullify the new legislative measures, the Netanyahu government could potentially disregard the verdict, thereby instigating a crisis concerning the ultimate source of authority.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Judicial Reform in Israel

More about Judicial Reform in Israel

• Overview of Israel’s Judicial System
• Biography of Justice Esther Hayut
• Political History of Benjamin Netanyahu
• Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s Judicial Reforms
• Israel Democracy Institute Research
• Legal Implications of Disrupting Judicial Seniority
• Far-Right and Ultra-Orthodox Coalition in Israel’s Government
• Public Protests Against Judicial Reforms in Israel
• Constitutional Crisis in Israel: A Historical Perspective
• Committee for Selecting Judges in Israel’s Legal System