Several ultra-Orthodox MKs accused the coalition on Monday of formulating legislation specifically to help one individual, Housing and Construction Minister Ze’ev Elkin, get appointed to the Selection Committee for Rabbinical Judges.
United Torah Judaism chairman MK Moshe Gafni and his party colleague MK Uri Maklev made their comments during a committee hearing of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee in a hearing on the government’s legislation to change the composition of the Selection Committee for Rabbinical Judges.
Elkin did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The coalition agreement between Elkin’s New Hope Party and Yesh Atid states specifically that the housing minister, Elkin, be appointed as a member of the rabbinical court’s appointments committee.   
But a law passed in 2013 requiring that at least one minister and one MK on the committee be women has created problems for Elkin, since the chairman of the committee must be the religious services minister, currently Matan Kahana of Yamina.
Since Kahana and Elkin are both men, Elkin cannot claim his place on the committee under the terms of the current law.
An initial version of the government bill, which passed its first reading last month, changed the 2013 law so that instead of guaranteeing one female minister and one female MK a spot on the committee, the bill stipulated that at least two of the four representatives from the Knesset and the government be women.
This meant that Elkin could serve alongside Kahana, while the two female representatives could both be MKs.
The opposition however denounced this change, saying firstly it would mean that the ultra-Orthodox parties could not have a representative on the committee since they have no female MKs.
In addition, MK Avi Maoz of the far-right Religious Zionist Party argued that 85 percent of Knesset members would be discriminated against by the law, since they would be precluded from obtaining a place on the committee.
New Knesset member Avi Maoz seen at the Knesset, ahead of the opening Knesset session of the new government, on April 05, 2021. (photo credit: OLIVIER FITOUSSI)
New Knesset member Avi Maoz seen at the Knesset, ahead of the opening Knesset session of the new government, on April 05, 2021. (photo credit: OLIVIER FITOUSSI)
A Knesset legal adviser acknowledged these problems, and so a new version of the legislation was proposed to the Knesset committee on Monday, in which the number of members on the panel would be increased from 11 to 13, and include one new minister of any gender.
This would allow Elkin a spot on the committee, along with a second female rabbinical courts advocate, leaving open the possibility that a male MK could still get elected to the panel, defusing the concerns of the Knesset legal adviser and Maoz.
But Gafni, Maklev and others still panned the new version of the legislation as designed specifically for one politician, Elkin.
“Why don’t they just write in the law that all the rabbinical judges will be appointed according to how Elkin decides,” asked Gafni sardonically.
“We all understand that everything being done here is so that we [ultra-Orthodox MKs] will be outside the committee,” he added.
Maklev said the bill was “personal legislation which has been created for political purposes because of suspicion and greed among members of the government members who all want to be a member of the committee.”
The UTJ MK continued, “The government is not acting in the interests of the state, but is rather intervening in personal quarrels between government ministers.
“This should be called the Cronyism Law and not the Rabbinical Judges Law.”
Elkin has not responded to questions as to why it is so important for him to obtain a position on the committee.
Tani Frank, head of the religion and state department of the religious-Zionist Ne’emanei Torah Va’Avodah lobbying group who spoke during the committee hearing, added that it was problematic that so many of the 13 members of the selection committee come from or be appointed by the government and the coalition.
Frank said that an “appropriate balance” needed to be found between representatives of the government and the Knesset.