In recent days, a professional meeting of the district court judges was held with the court of appeal against them in the Supreme Court. As part of the meeting, the conversation moved to discuss current affairs. During the conversation, Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit recommended that the judges read Esther Hayut’s speech at the conference of the “Public Law Association” in Haifa, so that the judges would have the tools to explain the danger inherent in the governance reform of Justice Minister Yariv Levin.
● The supreme judge who wants to inherit Hayut and is already preparing to abolish the seniority system without me
● The collapse of the Far company: with debts of NIS 400 million, Tehal turns to the freezing of proceedings
Two of those present felt very embarrassed at the transformation of the professional discourse with the court of appeal against them into a topical-political discourse, Globes learned. According to them, the judges should not be put at the point where they have to engage in the advocacy of the position of Supreme Court President Esther Hayut, or even think that the judges agree with Hayut’s radical position.
As I recall, President Hayut said at the conference last week that Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s plan for far-reaching changes in the judicial system is “a plan to crush the judicial system. It is designed to deal a fatal blow to the independence and independence of the judiciary and turn it into a silent authority.”
According to her, as expressed in her speech at the conference, “as soon as the presented change plan is realized, the year 1975 will be remembered as the year in which the country’s democratic identity was dealt a fatal blow.” And so Judge Hayut continued and detailed her opposition to all the details of Minister Levin’s reform.
The Knesset is also in focus
Recently, Supreme Court Judge Dafna Barak-Erez also held professional training for judges in the lower courts. The lecture dealt with the development of court rulings in tort claims on administrative decisions of the branches of the executive authority, when the decision violates human rights, as part of an indirect attack on the administrative decision. As part of the lecture, Judge Barak-Erez said that the time may have come for the courts to start hearing tort claims against the Knesset as a result of violations of human rights based on the enactment of discriminatory laws and even a fundamental law if it is determined that it allows discrimination and violation of human rights.
To this day, lawsuits against the Knesset are rejected outright by the courts stating that the correct course is not a financial lawsuit against the Knesset, but a direct attack on the legislation in the High Court. Now, according to Barak-Erez, it may be possible to allow an indirect attack in civil lawsuits against the Knesset. In a dramatic and extreme step, which both the Knesset’s legal advice and the government’s legal advice strongly oppose.
Judge Yitzhak Amit’s response through the spokeswoman: “Judge Amit does not intend to refer to the things that were said in a closed meeting with judges from the district court.”
Judge Dafna Barak-Erez’s response through the Judiciary spokeswoman: “Judge Barak-Erez gave a lecture about two months ago as part of an internal professional training for judges, which reviewed the law on financial claims against the executive branch: government ministries, local authorities – this is different from the Knesset. To clarify the framework During the hearing, the judge noted that the lecture does not deal with the issue of lawsuits due to violation of rights by Knesset legislation, although it is possible that this issue will develop in the future.”