Supreme Court president Yitzhak Amit has faced unusual resistance from other highly placed officials. Justice Minister Yariv Levin refused to recognize his appointment, and Prime Minister Netanyahu and Knesset Speaker Amit Ohana, representing Israel's legislative and executive branches, refused to attend his inauguration. What made Amit the subject of such unusual opposition - and will it lead to a governmental crisis?
Background
The controversy began when Amit's predecessor, Esther Hayut, left the position. Uri Vogelman was to have taken the position next, but declined on account of his age - had he accepted, his term in office would have been exceptionally short at less than a year before the mandated retirement at age 70. He instead became the acting President of the Supreme Court until a permanent one could be appointed by Israel's judicial appointment committee.
In accordance with the seniority system traditionally practiced in the Supreme Court, but not mandated by law, the judge with the longest tenure is appointed President of the Supreme Court. Accordingly, Justice Uzi Fogelman was to have been appointed to this position upon the retirement of Esther Hayut, but he announced that he would not run for the position because, if elected, his term as president would be the shortest possible – less than a year. In this situation, Amit was expected to be appointed President of the Supreme Court after the retirement of the President of the Supreme Court on October 16, 2023, and to hold the position until his expected retirement on October 20, 2028, but since the Committee for the Appointment of Judges did not discuss his appointment as President, Fogelman served as Acting President, and with his retirement, in October 2024, Amit became Acting President, being the senior judge.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin disagreed with Amit's leadership of the Supreme Court. As part of the ongoing controversy between Levin and the legal system that has surrounded Israel's judicial reform, he refused to convene the judicial selection committee, preventing Amit from formally taking the position of President.
The delay was exacerbated by the October 7th massacre and the Swords of Iron War, during which emergency measures were in effect that allowed the judicial system to delay an essential service significantly beyond what is normally permitted.
In late 2024, following public petitions and pressure from the Attorney General, the Supreme Court ruled that Levin was required to convene the committee, and Amit was elected as President. Levin and others opposing Amit boycotted the meeting.
Conflict Of Interest
Reports claim that Amit issued a legal order involving a board of directors where his brother was a member and as early as 2023, Amit was accused of ruling in conflict of interest in cases regarding construction violations in his home. He was party to a number of legal processes surrounding a property he owns in Tel Aviv, but used his former last name - Goldfriend - in the cases. He also registered with that name in Israel's directory of property ownership.
According to Yediot Aharonot, Amit did not report the processes as required to the court management, nor that the case included individuals on the list of relations that disqualify a judge. Simultaneously, he sat as a judge in cases in which the attorneys who represented him also represented one of the sides of the case.
The processes in question are connected to a property that Amit holds together with his brother, and which is slated for redevelopment. In 2019, the Tel Aviv municipality filed a criminal indictment against the owners of the property, including Amit, due to safety concerns. Later, the municipality withdrew the indictment against Amit.
Amit also drew scrutiny regarding his home in Mevaseret Zion, which was suspected of building violations during a renovation to the roof. The building authorities had granted a permit for the renovations only recently, despite them having been performed years previously.
Amit claimed, in a letter to the Justice Minister, that the renovations were legal. He insisted that they were permitted according to the original permit, even though they were not specifically noted. "In the course of our search for a residential property for my family, my wife and I disqualified one house after another in Mevaseret Zion because it was obvious that there had been building violations. The house that was eventually purchased in 2019 seemed to have no violations, and the sellers assured us that was the case."
"We thought that from a functional point of view, it is preferable to perform a solid roof above the said area. It should be noted that the request to replace the tile roof with a poured ceiling was initiated by us and not by the Planning and Building Committee, and was approved and allowed in the permit, but was not included in the list of the four conditions of the permit." He noted that he had requested an additional permit specifically for the roof by way of clarification.
The Head of Investigations and Intelligence in the Israel Police, Boaz Balat, decided not to request approval from the Attorney General, Gali Baharav-Miara, to open an investigation against Amit. Following an examination by Chief Balat, it was found that "there is no evidence and no basis for suspicion that requires the Attorney General to request a criminal investigation."
Levin demanded that Amit withdraw his candidacy due to the allegations. He said that the head of Israel's Supreme Court must be free of any accusations on the legality of his conduct in every legal sphere. When Amit refused, Levin sought to cancel the meeting. The committee refused, and the Supreme Court ruled that the committee did not have to comply with Levin's instructions.
Also behind the conflict is the question of who is chosen to be the head of a state commission of inquiry on the failures of October 7, should such a commission be appointed. A state inquiry commission is headed by a retired Supreme Court judge selected by the Court President. In that case, Amit would be expected to appoint former justce Esther Hayut, who expressed views in public against the plan for judicial reform despite this being a political stance, describing it as a “malicious attack” aimed at “decimating the justice system." In addition, Hayut is regarded as holding leftist views, which would lead right-wing Israelis to doubt the objectivity of a state commission's findings if she were at its helm.
Inauguration
Amit was sworn in as President in February 2025. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Speaker of the Knesset Amit Ohana boycotted the ceremony. Justice Minister Yariv Levin, along with members of right-wing parties in Israel, refused to recognize Amit's authority, with some right-wing movements beginning protests outside his home and petitions against him taking the position.
President Isaac Herzog denounced the boycotts in a speech at Amit's inaugural ceremony.
Implications
Levin has announced he will not cooperate with Amit in any way. His refusal to recognize Amit could bring about a constitutional crisis in Israel, as Supreme Court rulings will be left unenforceable without the executive functions of the Justice Ministry.
The most likely place for such repercussions to be felt is Israel's High Court of Justice system, in which civilians can bring a case to the Supreme Court without going through the lower courts. Such cases are frequently used for pressing matters such as preventing demolitions of Israeli construction or nullifying administrative arrests.
Without the Justice Ministry to carry out the orders, the court's rulings could conceivably lead to multiple miscarriages of justice until the two powers reach an agreement.