David Tal (Kadima) tabled a bill to change the way the
president and vice president of the High Court are selected.
According to the current law the most veteran judge serving
on the High Court takes over when the president retires. The
same applies regarding the vice president.
Tal wants to introduce a law making the Knesset responsible
for appointing both the president and vice president for
seven-year terms. According to the proposed legislation, the
Knesset would only be able to choose among the judges already
sitting on the High Court.
High Court President Aharon Barak is scheduled to retire
soon, to be replaced by Judge Dorit Beinish, currently the
most senior of the High Court judges. Her appointment has to
receive the approval of the Judicial Appointments Committee,
which is headed by the Justice Minister.
At a recent Bar Association conference the current justice
minister, Chaim Ramon, hinted it is not at all certain that
Beinish will become the next High Court president.
Tal and Ramon have strong ties. Tal is essentially Ramon's MK
in Kadima. But regardless of whether Tal's proposal was
submitted at Ramon's behest, any change in the selection
process for the High Court president would certainly be
welcome. The judges there do not represent the public, except
perhaps a small handful of elitists from North Tel Aviv and
Rechavia.
In a recent interview with Ha'aretz outgoing VP Judge
Mishel Cheshin, known for saying whatever pops into his head,
lodged stiff criticism of his president's stance on the
Citizenship Law, saying Barak doesn't care if another 30-50
terrorists blow themselves up, as long as no harm is done to
human dignity.
When Cheshin realized what he had blurted out he retracted
the remark, saying it was a slip of the tongue based on an
emotional storm — but the thing was already said. And
his remark serves as a clear indication of just how far the
Court President is from the public in terms of his opinions,
desires and world view and attests to the need to change the
selection system.
The Anti-Teshuvoh Bill
Warning: Chaim Oron (Meretz) has tabled a bill aimed at
curtailing the activities of the teshuvoh movement.
The law carries a six-month jail sentence for acting
"directly or indirectly to persuade a minor to do
teshuvoh as part of an organization whose aim is to
have people do teshuvoh." Oron defines teshuvoh
as "transforming an individual from secular to religious."
In the explanatory material on the law Oron writes, "In light
of the increased number of cases in which various religious
organizations in Israel persuade minors to do teshuvoh
through activities, disseminating material including threats
in schools and other means, it has been proposed to ban by
penal law direct or indirect activities by those who operate
as part of these types of organizations in order to persuade
minors to do teshuvoh."
Oron even goes one step further. "From a practical standpoint
persuading [people] to do teshuvoh resembles
persuading [people] to convert to another religion, which is
prohibited by Paragraph 368 of the Penal Code."
Heaven help us. How far can a leftist fall into decline? How
can one draw a comparison between persuading a child to keep
the mitzvas of his people, the mitzvas his forefathers
received on Mount Sinai and kept with mesirus nefesh
and love, to persuading a person to convert, in which case
which we are commanded to give our lives rather than
transgress?
The chareidi MKs will probably make every effort to prevent
this foolish bill from passing even a preliminary vote, for
if it gains momentum, chas vesholom, it could deal a
blow to the blessed work of introducing wayward children to
the Jewish legacy.
Where Oron got the idea that teshuvoh organizations
disseminate threatening material in schools remains a
mystery. Teshuvoh work is done only through darkei
noam, not by force, for this is darkoh shel
Torah.
Why does Oron believe that to disseminate material in schools
on every topic under the sun is permissible — except
for material on Judaism and the Jewish tradition? Why is it
fine to persuade a child to join a soccer team or take judo,
but wrong to persuade him to come to Tehillim or a
shiur on Parshas Hashavua? Why is it that when
it comes to religion the lofty ideals of democratic
liberalism suddenly vanish, particularly among the
enlightened folk at Meretz?
When they sink low they sink very low. What could be more
absurd than to put someone who tries to bring a child a bit
of Yiddishkeit behind bars for six months like a common
criminal?
