Online Discourse Challenges Judicial Authority, Creates Alternative Courts

Dr. Anat Peleg's book, "Judging Network," explores the rise of an "online judiciary" that competes with and challenges the official court system. This phenomenon, Peleg explains, involves online discussions and digital platforms forming alternative courts that shape public opinion and foster criticism of the legal and enforcement systems. These "judging networks" are driven by both concerned citizens and vested interests who invest heavily in influencing public consciousness, often refusing to accept official legal rulings as final and continuing to fight for their perceived justice.

The most significant Israeli case highlighted is the Roman Zadorov affair, where public online discourse, particularly around the series "Shadow of Truth," is credited with influencing the retrial and eventual acquittal of Zadorov after 15 years of imprisonment for the murder of Tair Rada. This massive online involvement angered legal authorities, with then-Supreme Court President Miriam Naor and then-State Attorney Shai Nitzan strongly criticizing the trend, likening it to a reality show and a danger to democracy. Peleg argues that findings from the online investigation impacted the retrial and corrected a miscarriage of justice, demonstrating how online discourse can raise public awareness of investigative and judicial flaws.

Another case examined is that of singer Eyal Golan, who was investigated for sexual offenses involving minors but avoided criminal charges. The online sphere imposed its own sanctions, including public shaming and calls for boycotts, impacting his career. Despite the official case being closed in 2014, renewed investigations and a detailed account by a complainant in 2024 reignited online debate. While criminal proceedings did not resume, Golan's performances were canceled, and municipal events featuring him were halted, illustrating the power of online public opinion to impose consequences.

The book also analyzes the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard defamation trial, dubbed the "first TikTok trial," where online discourse dwarfed discussions on major political and social issues. Peleg notes that Depp's fans dominated the conversation, employing a "well-oiled poison machine" that labeled Heard as a liar and mentally ill. Academic research indicated that a significant portion of pro-Depp online communities consisted of bots spreading misogynistic messages, leading to Heard's double defeat in court and online.

Finally, the article touches upon the online discourse surrounding Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's investigations, noting recurring themes of anti-elite messaging and calls for citizen empowerment. Peleg connects this to Trump's legal battles, suggesting that these "judging networks" have become integral to legal, political, and global processes in the 21st century. The concept of the "judging network" is presented as an evolution from traditional "media trials," where now everyone can participate in online public judgment, potentially influencing judges, as former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak noted, some judges are like "a leaf in the wind" to media influence.