Language:
Hebrew
Year of publication:
2023
Titel der Quelle:
ספר מרים נאור
Angaben zur Quelle:
(2023) 235-304
Keywords:
Israel.
;
Judicial independence
;
Judicial power
;
Separation of powers
;
Democracy
;
Constitutional law
Abstract:
This article discusses the protection of judicial independence in Israel, in the perspective of the relationship between the President of the Supreme Court of Israel, and the Minister of Justice, who is responsible on behalf of the executive branch for the judicial system in Israel. First, the article examines the accepted perception of the independence of the judiciary, and discusses four elements, that are essential for the existence of an independent judicial system: individual, substantive, internal and collective independence. The article places special emphasis on analyzing patterns of responsibility for the administration of the courts, and the model used in Israel, while comparing them with models accepted in other countries. Furthermore, the constitutional protection of the independence of the judiciary is also discussed. Second, the article analyzes the profile of the president of the court, and especially, of the president of the Supreme Court, who is in charge of the judiciary in general, and of the Supreme Court in particular. The article presents a distinction between the model of the president who sees the center of his role in the management of the court system – “the administrative president” – and a president who sees himself as “the leader president”, who perceives the core of his role in leading the judiciary, in terms of substantive adjudication. In addition, the work of the President of the Supreme Court in normal times and in times of crisis in Israel is discussed, and a comparison is presented between the styles of presidencies that characterized the presidents of the Supreme Court in Israel. Third, the relationship between the President of the Supreme Court and the Minister of Justice in Israel is discussed, in different periods in the history of Israel. The typical patterns of cooperation are examined, including the joint effort in the establishment and the defense of the independence of the judiciary. The main focus of the relationship, as presented in the article, was cooperation in protecting the judiciary and defending its independence, but over the years many disputes have arisen on multiple issues, between presidents and ministers in different periods, including in recent times. One of the basic foundations for ensuring the proper function of the judiciary is the protection of the principle of judicial independence. To allow the judiciary to fulfill its role faithfully, judges must be free of pressure and influence from other branches of government. Therefore, the judiciary must be as independent as possible – along with the need to balance the principle of judicial independence with other fundamental values in democracy, such as efficiency, fairness, accessibility, public trust and responsibility of the authorities towards each other. Democracy cannot exist if the judiciary is not independent of the other branches of government, and this is due to both the need to defend the fairness of the trial and the just decision, and to ensure the appearance of justice in the eyes of the public. Despite the importance of the principle of judicial independence, Basic Law: Adjudication is not entrenched. Given that the Basic Law: Adjudication can be changed by a simple majority, this can be done easily. Hence, a constitutional anchoring of the principle of judicial independence, which is essential to a democratic state, is important, i.e., requiring special majority for amending this Basic Law.
URL:
אתר את הפרסום בקטלוג המאוחד של ספריות ישראל
Permalink