The Lavi organization and the Im Tirtzu movement petitioned the Supreme Court to block the appointment of Judge Yitzhak Amit as the President of the Supreme Court. They argue that the decision to appoint Judge Amit was made hastily without a proper examination of serious allegations that have recently come to light.
The petitioners claim the committee responsible for selecting judges accepted only explanations from Judge Amit without any external verification or fact-checking, a stark contrast to typical procedures for senior appointments.
The petition accuses Judge Amit of sitting on cases allegedly involving parties considered to be disqualifyingly close to him, acting in conflicts of interest in real estate matters while being directly involved in legal proceedings in the area under dispute, and adjudicating a case with direct interest to his brother.
The petitioners quote Judge Amit's past rulings, emphasizing that, "We need a barrier against governmental corruption... In a democratic state, 'trust us' is not a valid answer. There should be procedures to prevent blind reliance on the executive branch." They highlight the discrepancy between his past words and his current conduct.
The petition compares the handling of Judge Amit’s appointment with other cases. For example, in the case of Commander Avshalom Peled, the legal advisor conducted a thorough examination lasting several weeks, and in the case of the Acting Civil Service Commissioner, a disciplinary investigation was launched over less severe allegations.