Subscribe to Print Edition | Sun., March 16, 2008 Adar2 10, 5768 | | Israel Time: 01:57 (EST+7) web haaretz.com   Back to Homepage Rosner's Domain Diplomacy Defense Jewish World Opinion National Print Edition Advertising Books Arts & Leisure Business Real Estate Easy Start Travel Week's End Anglo File

Friedmann's weak reasoning By Mordechai Kremnitzer Tags: Knesset, Daniel Friedmann This coming Sunday, the Ministerial Committee on Legislation will be hearing a proposal from the justice minister to change the system of appointing the presidents and vice presidents of the courts. But before we conduct a practical examination of the reforms proposed by Daniel Friedmann, some words of introduction are appropriate: The reforms will lead to a significant change in our governmental system, even though the government's basic guidelines state: "The ultimate standing of the Israeli legal system, headed by the Supreme Court, will be ensured. The government will preserve the high standing, as well as the range of functions and authorities of the Supreme Court, and will object to any change which may harm its standing, or to the way judges are appointed in the legal system." Don't the government's basic guidelines obligate the justice minister? Why is he permitting himself to act contrary to the wishes of most of the voters who elected the government? When Friedmann is given an opportunity to explain his proposals, he chooses mudslinging, cursing and groundless accusations against the Supreme Court: "The court operates like a religious party"; "the High Court of Justice wants power for itself, not to defend values." Advertisement Thus accepting Friedmann's proposals will be seen by the public as a justified punitive action against an institution that has transgressed, instead of a practical move for the benefit of the public and the legal system in Israel. We must not accept this damage to the status of the Supreme Court and to public confidence in it. Anyone who tries to convince us to bring about such a substantial reform bears the burden of persuasion. Not only is the justice minister unable to assume that burden, but his reasoning is weak, and some of his explanations are based on throwing sand in people's eyes. "I'm not trying to do anything against the law," he declared; in spite of that he was in a hurry to harm the residents of Gaza by means of a significant reduction of electricity, although he does not know whether that will help to reduce terror. That didn't stop him from presenting the cessation of electricity as a means to prevent the killing of soldiers, and he is complaining about the need to wait for legal consultation and the decision of the High Court. Another example is the criticism he leveled at the justices who were discussing the petitions against the plea bargain reached with former president Moshe Katsav, during the discussion of the petition and before they had ruled on it. Does anyone recall when a justice minister tried to threaten justices during a discussion of a pending case? Does anyone recall a justice minister who put a gun to the head of the High Court - if they don't act according to my views, I will work to change the law in a manner that will limit the powers of the court? The minister's claim that the court has removed the government's ability to govern is groundless. All the court is doing is to set boundaries of legality on government activities. Even the comparison that Friedmann makes between the High Court and the United Nations Security Council is baseless, and proves that Friedmann wants to release the government from the authority of the law. It is worthwhile to compare the High Court ruling on the subject of the separation fence to the opinion of the International Court of Justice: While the international body considered the construction of the entire fence an illegal step, the High Court adopted an opposite approach and intervened only in the matter of the route in a few sections of the fence. What Friedman didn't mention was the tremendous advantage that Israel has in world public opinion, including the Security Council, thanks to High Court supervision of its activities related to the territories. The High Court also serves as the defender of the heads of the executive and operational system in terms of international criminal law. Is it preferable for all of them to become targets of the enforcement of international law? Friedmann's attitude to the law is also evident in the changes he has introduced in the system of electing the attorney general and the state prosecutor, in a manner that is liable to place at the head of the general prosecution people who lack a backbone, government yes-men, serial closers of the files of public figures. The minister's proposal for a change in the way the judges are chosen, in a manner that will strengthen the influence of the government, is unworthy, because it politicizes the judicial system. The same is true of the new proposal regarding the appointment of court presidents and vice presidents. The judiciary will not be able to maintain its crucial independence on judicial matters without administrative independence. This requires that authority in administrative matters, including administrative appointments such as court presidents and vice presidents, be in the hands of the head of the judicial system - the president of the Supreme Court. The minister's proposal subverts the authority of the head of the judicial system and the ability of the judiciary to function as a system that is not dependent on the government. If the head of the judicial system loses his administrative powers, the system will fall apart. The minister's limited commitment to the rule of law is also reflected in his opposition to High Court supervision of the arraignment authority of the general prosecution. It is clear, even to Friedmann, that limiting supervisory power only to instances of lack of good faith or foreign considerations, means an absence of genuine supervision. Can we allow such far-reaching power over people's fates to operate without any real supervision? We can assume that in a short time from now, when the minister concludes his term and returns to write newspaper articles, he will blame the court for the additional decline in its reputation. It will probably not occur to him that he was involved in the wrongdoing. The writer is a law professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a research fellow at the Israel Institute for Democracy Bookmark to del.icio.us   Not even for Natalie A Haredi actor quits Natalie Portman's latest film due to rabbis' protests. Al-Jazeera boycott Al-Jazeera slams Israeli boycott as attack on free expression.   1.   DOWN WITH THE LEFTEST MONOPOLY 16:01  |  Steve 14/03/08   2.   The supreme court 02:34  |  mikeber 15/03/08

Today Online Bradley Burston: Ten Commandments for Arab and Jew at war Responses: 304 Officials: IAF helicopter hit by Palestinian fire over Gaza Responses: 284 Police arrest rabbi for 'inciting Palestinians' in East Jerusalem Responses: 147 State Dept. notes rise in world anti-Semitism over last decade Responses: 268 Haaretz.com TV: Al Jazeera slams Israeli boycott as attack on freedom of expression Responses: 83 More Headlines 20:41 IAF strike kills three Islamic Jihad militants in northern Gaza 22:54 Report: Syria wants 'public' peace talks with Israel 20:31 Shin Bet: No evidence of far-right plot to avenge J'lem yeshiva massacre 21:39 Israeli Arab leader: Assassination of Arab figure 'matter of time' 00:29 Firebombs hurled into home of Jewish Agency representative in U.S. 01:56 Netanyahu says will sue Ch. 10 for report he overspent on London trip 15:22 Vice Premier: W. Bank outposts harm Israel's relations with U.S. 18:15 Merkel: Threats that Israel faces are also threats to Germany 13:54 Actor quits Natalie Portman film due to rabbis' objections 21:19 Hard-liners take early edge in Iran vote, but reformists show strength 19:13 At least 10 killed, many injured in anti-China protests in Tibet 09:22 Islamic summit draft communique accuses Israel of 'war crimes' 20:06 EU demands Israel halt all construction in W. Bank, E. J'lem Previous Editions Select Day 14 mar 13 mar 12 mar 11 mar 10 mar 09 mar 07 mar 06 mar 05 mar 04 mar 03 mar 02 mar

Special Offers Advertisement FAREWELL ISRAEL New Film The Coming War for Islamic Revival - View Movie Trailer READY FOR PURIM? BUT - Who Will Guard The Hamentasch? Free the Palestinians from: Corrupt Kleptocracy, Tyrannical Theocracy, Abysmal Anarchy Long-term Israel programs MASA is your gateway. More programs. More grants. NEW! Dan Boutique Jerusalem Hotel Hip Dan Hotel in Jerusalem. Attractive Introductory Rates 7589 rockets fired so far HELP US TO HELP THEM FREE JEWISH HISTORY COURSE Berel Wein's best selling lectures. 5000 Years in Five hours /CD/MP3 Marina Royale Herzelia Pituach Your Luxurious Suite While Staying in Israel Fattal Hotel Chain Perfectly located hotels on best resorts of Israel. ISRAEL BONDS Build Israel Israel bonds - a multi-purpose way to celebrate Israel's 60th Eldan Rent a Car Israel's leading car rental company offers you a 20% discount on all online reservations Junkyard Junk a car - get free towing nationwide and a tax-deductible receipt

Home | TV | Print Edition | Diplomacy | Opinion | Arts & Leisure | Sports | Jewish World | Underground | Site rules |

Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.

© Copyright  Haaretz. All rights reserved