Last update - 00:00 14/03/2007
Friedmann ignores Beinisch, drafts bill limiting terms of court presidents
By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent
Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch vehemently opposes a bill that would limit the terms of court presidents, and expressed her opposition in a written opinion submitted to the bill's sponsor, Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann. However, Friedmann ignored her opposition and published a draft of the bill last week.
Under the bill, all court presidents, at every level, would serve a single seven-year term.
Currently, Supreme Court presidents serve until they reach the mandatory retirement age of 70, while district and magistrate's court presidents serve four-year terms, but can be reappointed indefinitely. The draft stated explicitly that term limits for Supreme Court presidents would take effect only following Beinisch's retirement.
While Beinisch opposes term limits for Supreme Court presidents altogether, she would like to replace certain lower court presidents, some of whom have served for 10 or 12 years already.
However, Haaretz has learned, she believes that term limits for lower court presidents need not and should not be anchored in new legislation, as the existing law is sufficient. This law states merely that lower court presidents' terms can be extended for "another four years," but then attorney general Michael Ben-Yair ruled that this language permitted indefinite extensions. Beinisch thus believes it would suffice for the current attorney general to issue a new opinion interpreting this language as permitting only a single extension.
Another provision of Friedmann's bill that has upset the legal establishment would bar people from becoming court presidents if they are due to retire in less than three years. Legal sources charged that this proviso hurts precisely the most experienced judges.
In response to this report, Friedmann's office said: "President Beinisch did indeed give us an opinion, and the minister took into account some of the points the president raised and changed his bill as a result. However, the legislation ultimately rests with the legislature and the minister, who is supposed to set policy."