The Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, MK Simcha Rotman, a lawyer by profession argued before the judges of the Supreme Court, at the hearing of the petition in the High Court on the Basic Law of the Judiciary - reducing the reason of reasonableness.
Rothman began with a story about the "blood tube" at the Technion, in which the vice president gave an exercise to design a blood transfer tube from Haifa to Eilat, and at the end disqualified all the students and explained: "I did not ask to test your ability to design a blood tube, but to test your moral sensitivity. None of you He asked why there is a need for a pipeline to transfer blood from Haifa to Eilat, whose blood is this, and who spilled it?" said Rothman.
Forensic techniques from Bangladesh and Pakistan
"Following that experiment, a department of humanistic studies was established at the Technion. The department's website includes Hanani's story and concern about a situation where "shoemakers deal with the atom" in the country, because the students lack the necessary humanistic and political training ("calculation bars"). The petitioners, and to our great regret, also the legal advisor To the government, we offer to your honor various legal techniques, from the threshing floor and from the winery, from Bangladesh, Uganda and Pakistan, in order to invalidate the amendment to the Basic Judiciary Law."
And they bombard your honor with different questions. Is it possible to disqualify by virtue of the unconstitutional constitutional amendment doctrine, or according to the principle of misuse of fundamental laws, or in general according to the principles of Hebrew law that were expressed in the ruling regarding the third apartment tax.
"But the very act of dealing with these questions is a failure of the test. To a certain extent, even the short answer I submitted that dealt with the question of authority, is already a failure of the test. Because these are all questions about how to design the tube in which the blood flows, but no one asks themselves why such a tube is needed?
Even with all the arguments, the clever ones, the clever ones or the stupid ones. What is the justification for taking from the State of Israel its most basic characteristic as a democratic state? the free elections. the ability of the public to express its opinion. the ability of the public to change the laws by which its life is conducted. the ability of the public to determine the arrangements according to which the government of the people operates, by the people, for the sake of the people."
Do not try to take democracy away from the people of Israel
The judges interrupted Rothman's words time and time again and Rothman answered them that as far as he was concerned, they were not supposed to discuss and had no authority to discuss the Basic Law.
"In fact, the very holding of this hearing indicates that the court does not respect the judgment of the public. The very thought that it is possible to hold a legal hearing, clean and sterile, when the basic question up for discussion is whether the court acts properly today? Or acted properly in the past, indicates a blurring of values .
Can you be the ones to judge this question, without fear, without bias, without being biased because you are dealing with your honor, your position and your powers? I understand that you think you are acting well, but if you will be the final arbiters on this question as well, where are the balances? Where are the brakes?"
"In a democratic country, the people are the sovereign. Do not try to take away the Israeli people's democracy and their trust in democracy. Join the movement to correct the judicial system and restore public trust in it. This is not a political move. This is a necessary move in which all government authorities must be partners. This people He has been crying out for years for justice, don't make him and us wait any longer."
