Levin attacks his coalition colleagues: "They did not give me support"

In an exclusive interview with 103fm, Justice Minister Yariv Levin summarized his term at the Ministry of Justice, which was characterized by confrontations with the Supreme Court, broad public criticism, and controversy surrounding the judicial reform. Alongside sharp criticism of the judicial system, Levin also attacked his coalition colleagues, claiming he did not receive the support he needed.

Levin addressed the turning point that he says disrupted his tenure: "There is no doubt that I did not receive the full support I should have received. If the entire coalition had stood as one man and had not surrendered on the night of Gallant and had not delayed the legislation, we would not have stopped the reform. I think there was a folding before this violence, a thing that should not have been done. I warned then that if we surrender to this, they will not accept it as an attempt to reach compromises, but will accept it as a surrender and will trample us."

He added: "At that time, no one believed anymore that I would succeed in doing anything. I did not give up and did not raise my hands. I do not deal with disappointments, I look at the essence. In the end, the moment the truth broke out, it was impossible to stop this move. At the first opportunity I had, I renewed the reform move, and I think we reached tremendous achievements despite all these conditions. I definitely expect not only a victory in the elections, but also absolute support after the elections, in order to fulfill the will of the public and complete the reform."

He later addressed the ongoing confrontation with the Supreme Court and sharply attacked the judicial system: "This was the most significant and most important term that a Justice Minister has ever done. A term of huge change, a term of exposing the truth, and a term that laid foundations to complete this move in the next term. Exposing the truth, taking off the masks, and the fact that what existed here for long years without interference has changed completely - these are the basis for any big change."

According to him, "Exposing the truth led to a long series of achievements that we have already achieved - changing the method of selecting judges, changing the method of the Commissioner for Complaints against Judges, appointing a long series of judges in the district and magistrate courts who would never have had a chance to be appointed, and removing the Police Investigation Department (Mahash) from the State Attorney's Office. The list is long and unprecedented. We have not yet completed all the work, and not everything is possible in one go."

"Dictating their values to the public"

Later, Levin defined Israel as a "judicial dictatorship" and attacked the opposition to the reform: "In dictatorships, one cannot expect that those who hold the power will simply get up and voluntarily hand it over to the people when the people rise up. Usually, in this situation, they try to tighten the grip, to make people despair, and this is what we see in these rulings. The judges understand that what was will not be. A reality in which a handful of people actually choose themselves by the 'friend brings a friend' method and dictate to the entire public their values and their worldview, which does not win a majority in the elections, is certainly not a democracy - but the opposite of democracy."

He claimed, "The rule of the judge is the opposite of the rule of law. There is a group here that has become accustomed to ruling things in a way quite similar to what happens in other dictatorships. When the people rise up and see the truth, they naturally try to make us despair and do more extreme things. Many judges tell me that if the right wins the elections, certainly if I return to the Ministry of Justice, we will complete this big change."

Levin added that the public supports the move: "The public understands and demands the change, the support for it is enormous and this process is progressing. Those who oppose this are the heads of the judicial system who try with delusional rulings to stop this and make us despair, and they will not succeed."

He later also addressed the Mahash law and claimed that it is one of the signs of change: "The process has not yet ended, it is being conducted professionally according to the law. I am convinced that we will not only get a new head of Mahash, but also an independent Mahash that is not subject to the State Attorney's Office. All the announcements and rulings are desperate attempts by a system that understands that the genie is out of the bottle and the wheel that has started to turn cannot be turned back."

In conclusion, he said that the election results will determine the future of the reform: "If we win the elections, based on all the infrastructure that has been prepared and the changes that have been made, we will be able to finish the work. In the next term, two-thirds of the Supreme Court justices will be replaced. Even the judges themselves know that if we win the elections, they will be forced to accept into their ranks completely different people, such as Dr. Bakshi, Dr. Biton, and others, and in this situation, we will get a different court with different rulings."