This article is proof as to why our former Justice Minister was right in trying to change the courts. Aharon Barak has shown in his speech how far over the line the courts have gone to interfering in our lives. In a lot of ways the courts and people like Barak are no different then the Ultra Orthodox and their political arm twisting. Barak, you retired from the courts, so please shut up and go away

People like Aharon Barak & Shimon Peres are the greatest reason for enacting term limits for every position in government and public service. In the US, look at the enormous economic destruction worldwide wreaked by Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Murtha, Charlie Rangel, Nancy Pelosi, and other entrenched legislators via their incredibly incompetent policies, ignorance, and social engienering. People who create entrenched power bases and relationships; control and fill virtually permanent committee appointments; and are able to impose their (often skewed) perspective over lengthy periods ARE DANGEROUS TO SOCIETY. Lifetime appointments were created in an era when life expectancy was much shorter, there was a far lower standard of public health, nutrition, medical care, and technology. More importantly, there was also a greater degree of personal honour, humility, public integrity, and an understanding of the privilege, trust, and responsibility of public service and social coherency. Regardless of intelligence, talent, and skill, fresh blood is always needed. There are a lot of "irreplaceable people" 6 feet under. Effectively, a lifetime appointment creates a form of "Royalty", which is exactly NOT what was intended in a representative democracy with recurring periodical elections. By becoming "Permanent Professional Politicians", we get Olmerts and Ramons. They are divorced from economic reality, ordinary people, and the daily workings of society. Human's underlying biological drive for acquisiton (money, power, assets), control of their surroundings, propogation of their DNA, and their ego will ensure distortion of "the system". There is nothing wrong with (say) a 10-15 year term for a High Court Judge, with a cap on years of service (although there is a mandatory retirement age). There is nothing wrong with (say) a 3 term limit on MK's, with an aggregated 10-15 year cap on total government service (bureaucratic, legislative, ministerial). IMO, aside from the immediate existential danger of jihadist crazies, the next major challenge to ALL Western societies wil be limiting and functional discipline of out of control politicians and "Public Servants" using OPM (Other People's Money), and having control of the mechanisms of power (police, courts, etc). Term limits and mandatory rotation is a good place to start for people like Aharon Barak, Olmert, Peres, et al.

But nevertheless his decisions have been some of the most influential in shaping Israeli law. His expertise and opinions remain invaluable despite the fact that he no longer operates as a judge in a professional capacity. Barak is, of course, correct. The High Court has always - since the very beginnings of the state - been a very important body in defending the rights of Israelis from the executive branch. A highly relevant example would be the High Court decision 'Kol Ha'am' in the 1950s, in which the executive branch attempted to limit freedom of the press under the pretext of "defence" considerations. The High Court at that time ruled, in a decision which in hindsight we can all agree with, that our right to freedom of speech outwieghed the particular security concerns raised in those circumstances. If we heeded your advice, the High Court would not have intervened, and we would not have had this landmark case which serves, in Israeli law, as the basis in case law for our right to freedom of speech to this day. "Security" and "defence" do not give the executive a carte blanche right to do whatever they please - those considerations must be weighed against the rights of the individual -- and only the High Court is capable of doing so.

The court is supposed to be outside of the political debate and to objectively weigh the different sides. Barak made the court more likely to intervene with decisions that conflicted with the political leanings of the Left while at the same time preventing the court to reflect the variations of society. If you do not share the views of head of the court, you have no chance of joining the court. The court rules over the people and not for the people now.

Wasn't it Aharon Barak who released Demnajuk, the racist murderer of 29000 people, so he could live another 15 years of freedom and happiness with his family? Enough said.