Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin Calls Israel a 'Judicial Dictatorship' Amid Reform Battle
In an exclusive interview with 103fm, Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin reflected on his tenure marked by intense clashes with the Supreme Court and widespread public criticism over the judicial reform. Levin criticized both the judiciary and his coalition partners, claiming he lacked the full support needed to advance the reform agenda. He pinpointed the "Galant night", when legislation was halted due to coalition dissent and violence, as a turning point that disrupted his efforts, stating, "If the entire coalition had stood united and not yielded to the violence, the legislation would not have been stopped."
Levin described his term as the most significant for a justice minister, emphasizing the exposure of long-standing truths about the judiciary and foundational changes achieved, including reforms to the judicial selection process, complaints commissioner system, and appointments of district and magistrate judges previously unlikely to be appointed. He asserted that the reform is ongoing and cannot be completed in a single phase.
He controversially labeled Israel a "judicial dictatorship," accusing a small group of judges of controlling the system through a "clubby" selection process that imposes their values on the public without electoral mandate. Levin argued that judicial supremacy contradicts the rule of law and likened the judiciary's resistance to authoritarian tactics to suppress popular will. He expressed confidence that if the right-wing wins upcoming elections and he returns as justice minister, the reform will be completed.
Levin also highlighted the overhaul of the Police Investigations Department (Mahash), asserting it will become independent from the Attorney General's office, despite judicial attempts to block the changes. He concluded that the election results will determine the future of the reform, noting that two-thirds of Supreme Court justices will be replaced in the next term, potentially leading to a court with different rulings and composition.
