Israeli Supreme Court President Apologizes for Remarks on Haredi Phone Use

President of the Supreme Court Yitzhak Amit has apologized for remarks made during a High Court of Justice hearing concerning the use of smartphones by members of the Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) community. Amit stated that he should have expressed himself differently and regrets any offense caused to those who heard him, according to Asher Koleh, the ombudsman for complaints against judges. Amit presided over petitions challenging a decision by Minister of Communications Shlomo Karai to expand the operations of Haredi radio stations. Petitioners argued this was an illegal benefit to government associates, while Karai contended it was essential for emergency information dissemination, as most Haredi individuals do not own smartphones for Civil Defense updates.

During the August hearing, Amit had commented to a Civil Defense representative that many in the Haredi population possess two phones: a "kosher" phone for show and a second, "smarter" phone for actual use. The complainants alleged this implied Haredi individuals are hypocritical, outwardly displaying only kosher phones while secretly using smartphones. Amit explained that a primary justification for expanding broadcasts was to reach Haredi individuals without smartphones. He referenced the state's response, which acknowledged that many Haredi individuals might indeed hold both a kosher phone and a regular mobile device.

Amit further clarified that his reference to a "kosher phone for show" aimed to recall arguments made within the Haredi community itself about the importance of outwardly displaying kosher phones as a "<bos> identifier" within their community. He noted that the term "to show off" and its variations are used in this context, even in Haredi-affiliated media and legal proceedings. Amit asserted his intention was solely to address factual claims relevant to the petition, using everyday language common in discussions about kosher phones. He expressed regret that his words were misinterpreted by the media and caused offense.

In his concluding remarks, Amit acknowledged that his statements had offended parts of the Haredi public, which was not his intention. After reviewing the hearing recording, he concluded that given the issue's public sensitivity, the phrasing should have been different, and he regretted the offense caused. Koleh's decision stated that given Amit's explanation of his intent and his regret, the complaints would be closed without further inquiry.