Israeli Lawmaker Slams Judiciary and International Law at Conservative Conference
Translated & summarized from JDN by baba
Simcha Rothman, Chairman of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, strongly criticized Israel's judicial system and international law at the National Conservatism Conference in Jerusalem. He argued that judicial activism undermines the separation of powers and that judges are effectively self-appointed and more accountable to foreign academia than the Israeli public. Rothman also questioned the limitations imposed by international law on Israel's ability to combat terrorism, drawing a controversial comparison to the war against Nazi Germany.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- MK Simcha Rothman criticized Israel's judiciary for activism and undermining elected officials.
- Rothman stated Israeli judges are self-appointed and more accountable to foreign universities.
- He argued the Supreme Court's extensive case load dwarfs that of the U.S. Supreme Court.
- Rothman questioned international law's restrictions on Israel's counter-terrorism efforts.
- He controversially compared Israel's fight against terrorism to the war against Nazi Germany.
Simcha Rothman, Chairman of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, delivered a sharp critique of Israel's judicial system and international law at the National Conservatism Conference (NATCON) held in Jerusalem. Speaking at the event, co-hosted by the Herzl Institute and the Edmond Burke Foundation from Washington, Rothman focused his remarks on judicial activism, appointment processes, and the judiciary's conduct in relation to elected officials.
Rothman criticized the extent of judicial intervention, arguing it undermines the principle of separation of powers and the Supreme Court's authority. "In Israel, separation of powers means the court can decide everything. You can't call this a court," he stated. He contrasted Israel's situation with the United States, noting the U.S. Supreme Court hears a very limited number of cases annually, while Israel's Supreme Court handles tens of thousands. Rothman asserted that this involvement extends to influencing the appointment or dismissal of senior officials, such as the Finance Minister or the Internal Security Minister, a phenomenon he described as a daily occurrence.
He further contended that the Supreme Court's actions constitute not only an offense against human language but also against the core concept of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. Addressing the selection of judges and the legal elite, Rothman attacked their appointment mechanism, claiming they are accountable to academia rather than the public. "These people need to be accountable to academia, not to the people. They are not elected by the people, even in Israel, judges appoint themselves in practice. So they care more about what they will say in Yale, Harvard, or Princeton, but not what they will say about them in Israel," he declared.
In the political-security portion of his speech, Rothman discussed the legal rules guiding Israel in wartime and the constraints of international law. He drew a parallel between Israel's modern fight against terrorism and the historical war against Nazi Germany, questioning why Israel cannot act similarly. "You destroyed the Nazi ideology through war. You caused the Nazi ideology to disappear from the world, right? You bombed Nazism until it disappeared from Germany. Why are we not allowed to do this in Israel?" he asked. Rothman argued that international law has evolved negatively, limiting decision-making capabilities. "But international law has developed, and now it is forbidden to do what was permissible against the Nazis. If this is how international law has developed over the years, I would not call it development, I would call it degradation, because I aspire to justice," he concluded.