Yariv Levin
Yariv LevinChaim Goldberg/Flash 90

Justice Minister Yariv Levin published a lengthy post on Saturday night in which he claimed that the justices of the Supreme Court left him no choice, compelling him to act to restore the powers of the government.

Levin essentially issued an ultimatum to the justices: Accept my compromise, or I will renew the legislative process related to the Judicial Selection Committee.

As part of the compromise, the Justice Minister proposed the following: Justice Yitzhak Amit would be appointed President of the Supreme Court; Justice Noam Sohlberg would serve as Deputy President; Levin would appoint Dr. Rafi Biton or Dr. Aviad Bakshi, head of the legal department at the Kohelet Policy Forum, as a justice; Levin would select a second female judge for the Supreme Court from among the district court judges; the justices would select a liberal candidate; five judges for the Jerusalem District Court would be appointed by mutual agreement; and the Ombudsman for Complaints Against Judges would be chosen jointly by Levin and Amit. In return, the advanced legislation being prepared by the Knesset Constitution Committee for a vote in the plenum would be shelved.

The leaders of the parties in the coalition are set to meet on Sunday to discuss Levin’s demand to legislate changes to the Judicial Selection Committee and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir's demand to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara.

In his post, Levin wrote, "Immediately after the outbreak of the war, the coalition announced a freeze on all discussions regarding the judicial reform. At the time, I thought it was inappropriate to address divisive issues when the country was engaged in a multi-front war.”

“A few weeks after the war broke out, I announced my intention to convene the Judicial Selection Committee and work toward appointing judges by broad consensus, as required during wartime. In the months following the outbreak of the war, we succeeded in appointing 162 judges with the unanimous agreement of all committee members—a record number."

"Regarding appointments to the Supreme Court, I was and remain interested in reaching compromises. On August 26 of this year, I approached [then-]Acting Supreme Court President, retired Justice Uzi Vogelman, with a compromise proposal: Justice Yosef Elron would serve as Supreme Court President for approximately a year, followed by a candidate selected by the justices. I also proposed that the justices present two candidates for Supreme Court judgeships to coalition representatives, from which one would be chosen, while the coalition representatives would present two candidates, from which one judge would be selected. Regarding a third justice, I suggested a mutually agreed-upon appointment from among district court judges across the country.”

“Minutes after I sent my proposal to Justice Vogelman, he rejected it contemptuously without even discussing it. Justice Vogelman knew full well that I was willing to negotiate the details of the proposal. Acting Supreme Court President Justice Yitzhak Amit also knows this, yet they chose to entrench themselves in their refusal," Levin wrote.

"A few months ago, the Supreme Court, in a panel led by Justice [Yael] Willner, decided that my role as Justice Minister would be purely symbolic. Justice Willner issued an order that effectively stripped me of my legal authority to set the agenda of the Judicial Selection Committee, unilaterally nullifying the consensus-based approach that had achieved an unprecedented number of appointments.”

“Even though the order is blatantly unlawful, I decided to proceed with the process. I published the names of the candidates in the official records, and the Judicial Selection Committee began deliberating the matter.”

“But the Supreme Court was in a rush. This past Thursday, in an unprecedented move, the panel decided to set the Committee’s agenda on its own, imposing a deadline to vote on the Supreme Court President within five weeks—without regard for the process. No time was allocated for meaningful discussion of the numerous objections raised. Simultaneously, the justices and representatives of the Bar Association blocked the broadcast of committee proceedings to secretly push through Justice Amit's appointment, ignoring the many objections and serious questions that have arisen," the Justice Minister wrote.

"These unprecedented actions are accompanied by a series of reckless decisions by the Supreme Court and its justices. Several weeks after the horrific October 7 massacre, the Court fully seized the Knesset’s powers, issuing a globally unprecedented decision to annul a Basic Law passed by a significant majority of more than half of all Knesset members.”

“The Court did not stop there. Since the war began, it has deliberated on the conditions of terrorists involved in the October 7 massacre, considered humanitarian aid to Hamas in Gaza, and even weighed ordering the state to release bodies of terrorists while our hostages languish in Hamas tunnels. This evening, it was reported that Justice Ruth Ronen even visited the Ofer Prison to oversee the detention conditions of Hamas Nukhba terrorists.”

“The government acted responsibly, suspending all discussions of the judicial reform when the war began. The Supreme Court, at the height of irresponsibility, decided to exploit the situation to further seize the powers of the Knesset and government. Today, former State Attorney Moshe Lador joined this irresponsibility by calling on soldiers to declare their refusal to serve," Levin stressed, referencing Lador's controversial statements made earlier on Saturday evening.

"This reality is unacceptable. The Supreme Court is pushing the Knesset and government to act now to restore their powers. I held back. They escalated. I sought to avoid addressing these issues during this time. They issued unprecedented orders and imposed an aggressive and coercive timetable. I sought to reach consensus-based appointments that would enjoy public trust. They shut the Court’s doors to anyone who doesn’t share their views. They have left us no choice. This cannot continue. We, too, have rights," concluded Levin.