Ex-Supreme Court Justice Questions Past Rulings Amid Judicial Debate

Former Supreme Court Deputy President, Professor Akyam Rubinstein, has spoken about the role of religious judges on the bench and refuted claims that Supreme Court presidents unduly influence judicial panels and rulings. In a conversation with Rabbi Professor Yitzhak Cohen, Rubinstein addressed the perception that religious judges are often in the minority on religious and state issues. He explained that while there was never an official quota for religious judges, there was an understanding from the state's inception that religious representation was appropriate for their voices to be heard and for the potential contribution of Jewish law.

Rubinstein, who now heads Ashkelon Academic College, recalled numerous religious judges who served on the court, including Simcha Assaf, Moshe Zilberg, and Menachem Elon. He noted that he brought to the court his extensive public service experience and a commitment to Jewish law, viewing it as a mission to give voice to this national cultural treasure. He emphasized that Jewish law should not be the exclusive domain of religious judges but a national heritage accessible to all.

A significant point of contention for Rubinstein was the ruling on registering same-sex couples married abroad. He dissented from the majority, which viewed registration as a primarily administrative act. Over two decades later, Rubinstein expressed uncertainty about how he would rule today, acknowledging that societal developments might lead him to reconsider. "I ask myself, and I don't have an answer right now, what would I do today in terms of looking at social developments," he stated, noting that issues once considered marginal are now more prominent.

Rubinstein also discussed former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak, dismissing the notion that a president can impose their views on other judges. While Barak would attempt to persuade judges during internal discussions, Rubinstein asserted that judicial independence is paramount and that judges are not beholden to anyone. He also qualified claims that a president can predetermine a case's outcome by selecting the panel, explaining that panels are generally chosen based on seniority to avoid bias, though sensitive issues, particularly concerning religion and state, can be influenced by a judge's worldview.

Rubinstein defended the judiciary against what he called excessive criticism, highlighting that most cases involve routine civil, criminal, and administrative matters, not just high-profile political ones. He revealed that the most challenging cases for him were child adoption proceedings, where decisions profoundly shape a child's future. He also touched upon Barak's relationship with Judaism, attributing Barak's views partly to his Holocaust experiences and his belief in a Jewish state and human rights. Rubinstein concluded by noting the significant workload and shortage of judges in Israel, leading to long delays in court proceedings, and reiterated that ultimately, a judge decides based on law and conscience, with no boss.