The Chief Justice of Israel’s Supreme Court, Aharon Barak, has publically expressed his opposition to the candidacy of Ruth Gavison, a professor of law at the Hebrew University, who is being considered to fill a vacancy on the high court.
Barak, a controversial justice who’s interventionist legal approach tends to favor Israel’s left wing establishment, said at a conference in Neve Ilan on Friday that Gavison would “bring an agenda” to the Supreme Court.
While calling her a “legitimate candidate,” Barak said that he opposes Gavison’s appointment because “she opposes everything that a court is supposed to do.” As a result, Barak said Gavison “was unsuitable for the Supreme Court.”
“Gavison’s agenda has forced me to take a stand,” said Barak. He said he would have approved of her candidacy, but for her position regarding the role of the court in Israeli society.
Dr. Yitzhak Klein, director of the Israel Policy Center, a constitutional and legal think tank, said that Barak and Gavison have opposing judicial agendas. While Barak favors judicial activism, Gavison opposes it.
Klein said that Gavison “wants to leave political and moral value decisions in the hands of the people’s elected representatives.” If she is appointed, he said, she will not legislate her political opinions “from the bench.”
He said Gavison “believes that it’s not the role of the court to substitute its judgment for the judgment of the elected branches of government, neither in relation to political questions in general, nor in regard to foreign and defense policy.”
In Israel, justices are selected by a committee made up of judges, lawyers, and politicians.
One of the three judges on the selections committee is Chief Justice Aharon Barak. Klein said that Barak’s statement in opposition to Gavison’s candidacy has impinged his objectivity as a member of the selection panel.
Michael Eitan (Likud), chairman of the Knesset Constitution and Law Committee said this morning on Israel radio that the committee for appointing judges should be abolished.
He said the committee selects judges by deal making, and not because of a candidate’s qualifications.
Eitan added that Israel’s system of selecting judges was one of the worst, and is contributing to the public’s loss of confidence in country’s judicial system.
Barak, a controversial justice who’s interventionist legal approach tends to favor Israel’s left wing establishment, said at a conference in Neve Ilan on Friday that Gavison would “bring an agenda” to the Supreme Court.
While calling her a “legitimate candidate,” Barak said that he opposes Gavison’s appointment because “she opposes everything that a court is supposed to do.” As a result, Barak said Gavison “was unsuitable for the Supreme Court.”
“Gavison’s agenda has forced me to take a stand,” said Barak. He said he would have approved of her candidacy, but for her position regarding the role of the court in Israeli society.
Dr. Yitzhak Klein, director of the Israel Policy Center, a constitutional and legal think tank, said that Barak and Gavison have opposing judicial agendas. While Barak favors judicial activism, Gavison opposes it.
Klein said that Gavison “wants to leave political and moral value decisions in the hands of the people’s elected representatives.” If she is appointed, he said, she will not legislate her political opinions “from the bench.”
He said Gavison “believes that it’s not the role of the court to substitute its judgment for the judgment of the elected branches of government, neither in relation to political questions in general, nor in regard to foreign and defense policy.”
In Israel, justices are selected by a committee made up of judges, lawyers, and politicians.
One of the three judges on the selections committee is Chief Justice Aharon Barak. Klein said that Barak’s statement in opposition to Gavison’s candidacy has impinged his objectivity as a member of the selection panel.
Michael Eitan (Likud), chairman of the Knesset Constitution and Law Committee said this morning on Israel radio that the committee for appointing judges should be abolished.
He said the committee selects judges by deal making, and not because of a candidate’s qualifications.
Eitan added that Israel’s system of selecting judges was one of the worst, and is contributing to the public’s loss of confidence in country’s judicial system.