High Court judges hinted on Tuesday
that they have no intention of interfering with the law that permits
yeshivos ketanos not to teach the Core Curriculum
(Leba). Their remarks were made during the course of a
provocative petition to annul the law and impose the Core Curriculum
at yeshivos ketanos. Judge Asher Grunis, who has been tapped to be
court president upon Dorit Beinish's retirement, said, "The fact that
a judge is displeased does not mean he can annul a law."
In a suit filed last year by Prof. Amnon Rubinstein, Prof. Uriel
Reichman and General (Res.) Elazar Stern, a bench extended to nine
judges headed by Justice Beinish heard the case. The petitioners
sought to declare illegal the law legislated in 2008, which enables
the yeshivos ketanos to be exempt from the Core Curriculum, and
demanded the High Court impose the Core Curriculum on the yeshivos
ketanos for the "welfare" of the yeshiva students themselves.
"Along come the petitioners, who are not claiming any of their own
rights were infringed upon and are seeking to protect the chareidim
from themselves by annulling a law legislated in the Knesset," Atty.
Eyal Yanun told the judges. "Does the chareidi public not know what is
best for it and its children? Does the curriculum at the yeshivot
ketanot harm the principal of human dignity? ... Is the absence of
the Core Curriculum not balanced by the learning proficiency imparted
by yeshiva study, their skills, education and contribution to others
and to the community?
"As one who sends his children to government schools, I feel a certain
discomfort. It would behoove us to show a bit of humility regarding
the chareidi education system. To set forth the Core Curriculum as if
there is no alternative is, in my opinion, not a humble approach.
Would we ever endeavor to claim that the education system in the
Kibbutz Movement, where an emphasis is placed on agriculture, is a
constitutional infringement on education or human dignity?...Our
position is that this petition is like a bull in a china shop. Not
every law that to a portion of the public is not right is then
unconstitutional."
Atty. Adiel Glass argued the case is "a precedent-setting petition
that seeks to annul a Knesset law not in order to protect individual
rights, but to impose the will of the majority on the minority. The
petitioners are well aware of the fact that the yeshiva students and
their parents are uninterested in human dignity that stands in
contrast to their world-view. The petitioners presumption of speaking
for a large segment of the population, saying they know better what's
best, is akin to people who try to help an old lady cross the street
when she doesn't want to go to the other side."
In summary, the judges hearing the case determined that if defects are
found in the law it would be problematic to intervene in Knesset
legislation. Judge Beinish also hinted that it would be difficult for
the court to reject the law on the basis of constitutionality.
