In the Supreme Court: 'The judges should ask themselves: Where did we go wrong with the Haredim?'"

January 12, 2023   

Ilana Dayan: I am reading A column you published this week in Yedioth Ahronoth' Under the title 'The Haredi fervor regarding constitutional reform should make the High Court justices stop and think: Where did we go wrong?' Where, in one sentence, did the High Court justices go wrong? Sherry Roth: When I stood at the gates of Ma'ashiyahu prison many years ago, I interviewed a lot of people there. In the column I wrote about 'Five-Year-Old Moishela,' but that was only because the column was short, there were a lot of people there and I, as a young reporter, said to myself: 'Wow, there's discrimination here. It can't be that these people, whose family member is going to prison, don't understand this.' And the people, one after the other, everyone I spoke to, had passion in their eyes, a belief in the righteousness of their path. Now, forget about people, let's say they don't understand... But maybe it's worth explaining the context. The context was a decision by the High Court to end discrimination against Mizrahi girls who want to study together with Ashkenazi girls at Emmanuel, and you're basically saying that little Moishe, who's standing there next to you and doesn't understand why his father went to prison, you're basically saying that the court needs to abuse ultra-Orthodox Mizrahi girls in order to gain the trust of little Moishe and his father? Shari: Well, when you take Moishe, it sounds really funny. But Moishe is like a parable. That's why I started by saying, Moishe was really a colorful spot, for the color, but there were a lot of people there. Dozens of people, family members. Forget the people who were there, the Jewish people were sitting in their homes, the entire Haredi community, and I hardly know people in the Haredi community who at the time justified the court. And I'm sharpening your question: On the contrary, because of what you're saying, what? I said to myself as a young reporter, don't people understand what the learned judges understand? You're basically saying, the Supreme Court is not only guilty of discriminating against Mizrahi girls, not only guilty of needing to put an end to this discrimination, it's also guilty of the Haredim interpreting its ruling in favor of the Mizrahi girls as a ruling against the Haredim. Shari: Ilana, over the years I have written dozens of articles against the phenomenon of discrimination. I have done, am doing and probably will do, unfortunately. That's why I started by telling you, I also asked myself exactly your question at the time. And at many other crossroads, during the half-million and million demonstrations against the court. But...? Shari: But... first of all, Emmanuel was an event where there really was no discrimination. And I was at Emmanuel, I got my feet wet, I was there, I saw what was there. But leave the Emmanuel story for a second, we won't reopen it. The court did not come up with a real story of discrimination. In the Haredi elementary schools across the country, there is no discrimination. Sephardic girls study with Ashkenazi girls, there are cases of discrimination in the seminaries. So to say that the court came to solve the problem of discrimination would be presumptuous. You yourself write in the same column, 'Let us, say the Haredim, preserve the spirit of the school and the education of our daughters.'. Sherry: Because there! There was a real problem. But let's leave Emmanuel aside. You write in the same column in Yedioth Ahronoth about Deri... Shari: I claim that he probably didn't go to the chairman of the Elections Committee because there is no trust in the judicial system. They are afraid in advance of going into the hands of the judges.  So Deri is allowed to mislead the justice of the peace, avoid appearing before the Elections Committee in a hearing on the question of disgrace, and then say that it's not him who is cheating, it's the court that has lost its trust? שרי: אני אומרת דבר אחד, אילנה. יש את המבוגר האחראי והוא בית המשפט העליון. אני אומרת: אם בית המשפט העליון מרגיש שיש ציבור במדינה, ואני חושבת שגם הציבור הערבי מרגיש דומה, אבל זה עוד עניין. אם ציבור שלם במדינת ישראל לא הצליח במשך השנים לתת בו אמון, אם חברי כנסת חרדים נכבדים, כאלו שלא חשודים בימניות יתר, קחי אחד כמו גפני תשאלי אותו אם יש לו אמון במערכת המשפט ותראי מה הוא יענה לך. אם כולם אומרים, אין לנו אמון, המבוגר האחראי צריך לעשות מעשה. אני לא שמעתי אף פעם שבית המשפט העליון ניסה לעשות איזושהי פעולת הסברה מול הציבור החרדי. ובואי, למה שהציבור החרדי ייתן אמון במערכת, שפועלת בשם עקרון הסבירות, שכולנו יודעים שהוא 'מבחן האדם הסביר' - איזה אדם סביר? בוזגלו מדימונה? יענקל'ה מרחוב חזון איש בבני ברק או החונטה השלטת, שרובה שייכת לאותה קליקה?  A moment before we talk about the junta. We'll soon talk about the 'clique' and the 'junta'... Shari: Tell me how many ultra-Orthodox judges there are in the Supreme Court... Why do you think there are no Haredi judges in the Supreme Court today? Sherry: Why aren't there enough Spanish judges on the Supreme Court, in my opinion? There are, but not enough? Why? Do an average, over the years, why? But we're talking about ultra-Orthodox judges. Maybe, just maybe, and tell me if it's related to that or maybe, just maybe, the lack of core studies in the ultra-Orthodox sector contributes to the fact that there are fewer people in the ultra-Orthodox sector who go to study law? Sari: Do you have any idea how many Haredi lawyers are roaming around the country today? Haredi! Go to the Knesset, I don't think there is an assistant to an MK in Shas - an assistant, not to mention an MK - who doesn't have a law degree. I talk to them, what degree do you have? Law, law, law. How many of them will get to be judges? Take MK Moshe Arbel, a lawyer, tell me when he will become a judge. And he is a learned, brilliant MK, I have many conversations with him, including legal ones, even these days around the Deri trial, tell me when he will become a judge and more in the Supreme Court. Well, that's why he became a member of Knesset. שרי: לא,  בואי, בשביל להיות חבר כנסת לא צריך להיות משפטן. לספר לך כמה חברי כנסת יש שהם רחוקים מלהיות מלומדים אפילו, לא רק משפטנים. וספרי לי מתי הוא יגיע לעמדת שפיטה, בטח בבית המשפט העליון. יקח שנים, אם בכלל. שתביני, מאז קום המדינה כמעט ולא היו, את בטח זוכרת את סיפורו של השופט הדתי הראשון בבית המשפט העליון. אפשר לספור אותם, אולי לא על יד אחת ואולי לא על שניים, אבל זה מאד מעט. ההגמוניה של השופטים, ואני עוקבת אחריהם שנים, היא מאד שייכת לזן אחד מסוים. עכשיו, להגיד על יריב לוין, שהוא משפטן מבריק, בן אדם מכובד, לא בן אדם מתלהם, אנחנו הרי מכירות אותו שנים, להגיד עליו שהוא רוצה להחריב את בית המשפט העליון, זה לא. הוא בן אדם שומר חוק, מאד חשוב לו הנושא הזה של החוק, יש פה איזושהי בעיה, שהשופטים כמבוגר אחראי צריכים לעצור ולשאול את עצמם: איפה טעינו?