| | NEWS
Opinion
Recommendations that are Not Recommendations
by Yitzchok Roth
The position of the attorney general has developed over the years to one of the most central positions of the Israeli government. The judicial responsibility to advise the government has turned the attorney general to one who is virtually running almost everything. His decision is veritably the last word on government decisions, including those of the various governmental offices. Now that the incumbent is completing his term, they are looking feverishly for a successor. A special committee is expected to recommend several candidates to the Minister of Justice from which to choose. This committee, one would think, will probably do a thorough job of examining the best one suited for this pivotal and central office.
Is this really the case? After all, we are talking about serious people, like the past president of the High Court, Asher Gronis, or the past Justice Minister, Dan Meridor. The committee is assumedly checking each candidate thoroughly and the recommendations which each one submits.
But this is not the case! At least this is what Avishai Greenzwieg, economic columnist of Globus maintains.
Among the various candidates promoted by the Minister himself, is the lawyer, Gali Baharav-Miara, a new name to the public who has, nonetheless, a fat portfolio of impressive recommendations, including that of the vice president of the High Court, Chanan Meltzer. He recommended her highly, as he wrote, "I became acquainted with attorney Miara twenty years ago, when she appeared as the senior lawyer for the Tel Aviv district in a case which dealt with a tender for establishing the first private power station in Israel. She represented the corporation against the Electric Company and the State. She impressed everyone with her professionalism and expert presentation."
Impressive, no? But after an examination by the reporter, it turned out that her performance was at a single session which took place 24 years ago. Interesting that Meltzer, who surely saw thousands of cases in his professional career, remembered this single one as having been "impressed by her professionalism..." Also interesting is the fact that he also remembered another case which came before the High Court. however the attorney representing the State was a different one, whom Meltzer mentioned by name without mentioning Miara. This superficial and trivial acquaintance with the Miara did not prevent Meltzer from showering superlative praises upon her.
Without going into details, let us mention that Greenzwieg reviewed recommendation after recommendation, and found that they were mostly vapid. When he asked the recommenders upon what basis they had endorsed those candidates, he got only incoherent answers.
He also found that the members of the committee themselves did not bother to inquire into the basis of the recommendations for such a significant position in the government. Why? Because. Things are run in this government by the motto of 'one friend brings another'. It is superfluous to examine who is worthy or not.
|
