“This is an unprecedented situation in the history of the State of Israel, when the continued failure to elect a permanent president seriously harms the principle of separation of powers” – from the state’s response
Today, 10 December 2024, the State Attorney’s Office submitted its response to the request of the Movement for Quality of Government in Israel to impose sanctions on Justice Minister Yariv Levin for not complying with the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding the appointment of a permanent president to the court. While the state opposes the imposition of sanctions, it asks the court to set a final date by which the election of a president must be completed.
In the detailed response submitted to the Supreme Court, the state claims that although the procedure for electing a permanent president to the Supreme Court is delayed, there is no reason to impose sanctions under the Contempt of Court Order. This is because the judgment, although it includes an operative element, does not include a clear and explicit date for the completion of the procedure.
In its response, the state emphasizes the seriousness of the current situation: “This state of affairs, in which for such an extended period no president has been appointed to the Supreme Court, is unprecedented in the history of the State of Israel,” and that “the continued failure to elect a permanent president to the Supreme Court severely violates the principle of separation of powers and the status and functioning of the judiciary.”
The state also notes that the absence of a permanent president has far-reaching consequences: “Beyond the immediate practical implications and the obvious damage to the independence of the judiciary, the ongoing situation of the absence of a permanent president of the Supreme Court has a significant negative public-symbolic effect and meaning.”
In light of this, the state requests that the Supreme Court determine, after hearing the parties, what is the last date by which the essential obligation arising from the judgment – the election of a president of the Supreme Court – will be completed.
Adv. Dr. Eliad Shraga, chair of the Movement for Quality Government in Israel: “The state’s response is an explicit admission of the systemic failure and complete irresponsibility of the minister of justice in handling the most serious constitutional crisis in the country’s history. The fact that the state itself is asking the Supreme Court to set a final date indicates the depth of the crisis and governmental chaos. It is impossible to carry on in a situation where the judiciary is paralyzed without a permanent president, and all because of narrow political considerations. We demand that the Supreme Court impose immediate sanctions that will ensure the appointment of the permanent president without any additional delay, to ensure the continued proper functioning of Israeli democracy.”
