Justice Minister Yariv Levin on Sunday asked AG Gali Baharav-Miara to permit him to hire independent representation in the pending High Court hearing on a petition to compel him, Levin, to assemble the committee to appoint judges.
Levin has been delaying the session of the committee to appoint judges because he is opposed to its makeup which includes three supreme court justices and two members of the bar. He believes the committee should reflect the electoral advantage of the coalition parties.
Levin justified his request, telling the AG: “Due to your usual extreme and adversarial positions against the government’s views, and in response to your question regarding the manner of representation in the petitions in question, I am forced to inform you that this time, too, I will require independent representation.”
Levin noted: “All this is done without detracting from the fact that the state of affairs you are creating is improper and that the role of the attorney general is to represent the government and its members and not to force them to acquire independent representation again and again.”
Last Wednesday, Levin wrote the AG that although her role is to represent the government, himself included, in petitions that are submitted against them to the High Court, he feels that he is not being represented at all in the legal process and that his position is not being presented to the Supreme Court.
Levin complained that Baharav-Miara sent him a short draft of his position, without the slightest effort to forge any argument in its support. The AG also told the court that “the minister made it clear that he is not asking for a separate representation but to bring his position within the framework of this response,” meaning the response that attacks the Justice Minister’s position, and sides with the petition against him.
Levin accused the AG of lying to the court (he was exceedingly polite about it), and wrote: “In effect, anyone who reads your response will think that it is a petition against me, and not a response on my behalf.
Beyond mentioning my position as I conveyed it to you, your entire response presents an extreme position against me that fully supports the position of the petitioners, without any trace of an attempt on your part to support my position with even one element from the multitude of arguments concerning the matter.”
He added: “Things reach their climax when you, as the one representing me, request that an order be issued against me exactly as the petitioners requested.”
Levin also wrote: “Can this be called a proper representation? Is there anywhere in the world, even in non-democratic countries, a situation where the person who is supposed to represent a party to a proceeding, requests that a judgment be given against the party he represents? How do you name a legal procedure where instead of two parties, the lawyer of one of them appears and also represents the position of the other party? Isn’t this like a soccer game in which only one team participates and kicks the ball into an empty goal?”
Baharav-Miara responded by accusing the Justice Minister of scheming to fire her (Coalition Leaders Wonder Why the AG Is Still Walking Among Them).
