Ahead of the expected High Court of Justice hearing on petitions challenging the tenure of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, a senior legal source claims that opinion-shapers on the far left are no longer content with criticizing the minister or the petitions themselves, but are instead seeking to pressure Justice Noam Sohlberg and influence his conduct.
According to the source, a series of articles and commentaries (in Calcalist and Haaretz) aim to recruit Justice Sohlberg to the activist camp. The judge is portrayed as someone who could potentially fall in line with the rest of the panel-described as the most activist bench on the court, including Justices Amit and Barak-Erez-and join efforts to remove the minister.
“The attempt is not subtle; it is overt and explicit, accompanied by dramatic language about ‘defensive democracy,’ a ‘fateful moment,’ and a ‘moral duty’ of the court to intervene in the composition of the government," the legal source said. “The recurring message is clear: even if Justice Sohlberg has long been regarded as a conservative, he is expected to change that conservatism in this case-not on the basis of an explicit statutory directive, but due to an ideological, values-based worldview that treats the lawful tenure of an elected minister as a ‘threat’ that must be thwarted through legal means."
The source added that “far-left commentators and alarmist media outlets are also attempting to push for a change to the Deri-Pinhasi doctrine-the precedent that allows for the dismissal of a minister when an indictment is filed against him-which itself has been subject to harsh criticism."
According to the source, “the commentators are well aware of the fact that no indictment has been filed against Minister Ben Gvir. Nevertheless, this is an attempt to expand an activist precedent set in the 1980s-when it involved a minister facing an indictment-and apply it to a situation in which there is no indictment, no conviction, and no statutory provision requiring removal. All that remains is ‘judicial discretion,’ which they are seeking to push to its outer limits."