Yariv Levin unlikely to name new High Court chief in Judicial Appointment Committee

High Court to hear petition over justice minister ignoring directive to appoint chief justice.

By ELIAV BREUER DECEMBER 12, 2024 12:38 Updated: DECEMBER 12, 2024 12:46

JUSTICE MINISTER Yariv Levin attends a swearing-in ceremony for newly appointed judges, at the President’s Residence in Jerusalem, in June. (photo credit: Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

The committee responsible for electing Israel’s judges will convene on Thursday afternoon, yet is again unlikely to hold a vote to elect a permanent chief justice, contrary to a High Court of Justice ruling in September directing Justice Minister Yariv Levin to do so.

Thursday’s meeting will include votes on whether or not to provide live footage of the debates regarding the chief justice election and will include a theoretical debate on the merits of the “seniority system,” according to a letter sent on Wednesday to the committee’s members. 

The “seniority system” is a tradition whereby the committee elects the longest-serving member of the court to the position of Chief Justice.

There are two judges currently vying for the position of permanent chief justice – interim chief justice Yizhak Amit, who is the longest-serving member of the court, and Yosef Elron. 

Levin prefers Elron, but the majority of the committee will likely elect Amit, and Levin has, therefore, refrained from holding a vote. In response to petitions on the matter, the High Court ruled in September that Levin did not have the authority to delay the vote unlimitedly and directed him to hold the vote as soon as possible.

High Court of Justice May 3, 2020 (credit: COURTESY HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE)

Levin has also refrained from filling three vacancies on the High Court bench, but unlike the appointment of a chief justice from amongst the current judges, the court in September ruled that Levin had the authority to continue delaying the three appointments of new judges.

Levin convened the committee on November 28 yet did not hold a vote for chief justice. The Movement for Quality Government in Israel responded by demanding that the High Court designate Levin in contempt of court for failing to follow its ruling. 

The hearing on whether the justice minister is in contempt of court is also scheduled on Thursday afternoon, just after the end of the Judicial Appointments Committee meeting.

Levin's argument 

Levin has argued that the High Court has a conflict of interest and cannot force him to appoint a chief justice since the appointment directly affected the judges themselves. 

He accused the judges of forcing the vote upon him in order to ensure that Amit is elected. The judges countered that their ruling was that the law required Levin to hold the vote, no matter the outcome.

---

---

Levin, alongside Knesset Constitution Committee chairman MK Simcha Rothman, was the driving force behind the government’s controversial judicial reforms in 2023. A central tenet of the reforms was a reformation of the makeup of the Judicial Appointments Committee. 

Who's on the committee? 

The nine-member committee currently has a majority of non-politicians: It includes three High Court judges, two representatives of the Israel Bar Association (IBA), two ministers, and two members of the Knesset (one of them from the opposition). 

Levin, Rothman, and others attempted but ultimately failed to pass a bill to alter the makeup of the committee such that politicians would make up the majority.

According to Thursday’s committee meeting agenda, Levin invited five experts to appear. Levin claimed that this was a request from the general committee at the previous meeting. 

All five of the experts are associated either with the pro-judicial reform Kohelet Forum or were publicly in favor of the reforms: Rothman, Prof. Talia Einhorn, Prof. Avi Diskin, Prof. Gidi Sapir, and Dr. Shuki Segev.

Einhorn is the mother of Srulik Einhorn, an occasional advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is wanted for an investigation regarding his involvement in the case in which highly sensitive classified documents were leaked to the German newspaper Bild.