The Regavim Report: Israel’s Supreme Court gives extremely preferential treatment to petitions filed by the extreme left.
A report prepared by Regavim statistically indicates what many of us have felt all along: the Supreme Court, and in particular President Dorit Beinish, shows preferential treatment towards extreme leftist organizations. This is expressed by expediting procedures in a fashion that is meaningful and obvious, issuing interim orders, by the participation of President Beinish in the court roster for those cases, the issuance of decrees nisi against the state, and by interference in government authorities, and more.
The way that the Supreme Court deals with cases was evaluated by the report according to identical, objective and measureable parameters. It is clear to see from the data that while petitions from the left are dealt with seriously and strictly, identical petitions from the organizations identified with the right are treated with disregard and a lack of seriousness.
The report scientifically examined set parameters, among them: the length of time the court took to respond, the number of sessions that took place, and the amount of time between sessions, which judges participated, as well as the issuance of interim and nisi decrees.
The report focuses on the procedural aspects of the legal proceedings, since these take place before any decision is made on the case. At this stage, the decisions of the judges reflect the point of departure and basic position from which they set out in relation to the issue. Because of this it is impossible to attribute the huge difference in the way petitions from the right and left are treated to fine distinctions in judicial scholarship.
We are not talking about one petition, or two, or even three. The report shows all the cases that are "mirror images" of each other, submitted before the court from opposite sides of the political spectrum, dealing with unauthorized construction, both Jewish and Arab, in Judea and Samaria between the years 2005-2009. They all point out to discriminatory treatment, and it seems that not one of the judges makes any effort to hide this.