[88491] High Court hearing on Ravilo's appointment: The judges question the demand for blanket disqualification

The High Court hears the petition on Ravilo's appointment: The judges pose questions to the petitioners

During a hearing held today in the High Court regarding the appointment of Ravilo, the judges raised pointed questions regarding the petitioners' demand for his disqualification. According to a report by ynet news, which covered the hearing under an atmosphere leaning towards criticism of the political and legal system, the judges asked during the session: "Why disqualify Ravilo before a conflict of interest arrangement?".

In a more detailed report by Netael Bandel and colleagues, it emerges that Justice Ruth Ronen placed a question mark on the very demand for total disqualification, and clarified that there may be issues that Ravilo will be prohibited from handling, but this does not justify disqualifying the entire appointment. Bandel quotes Justice Ronen who asked why Ravilo would not sign a conflict of interest arrangement as is customary in similar cases.

For her part, Justice Kanfi Steinitz reinforced this approach and suggested that perhaps the court should wait for the examination of the conflict of interest arrangement before a blanket decision is made. According to Justice Kanfi Steinitz, if the petitioners believe that the conflict of interest is so broad that it prevents the fulfillment of the role, it is possible that the correct path is to "attack in a petition the conflict of interest arrangement that will be established" and not the appointment itself.

The hearing reflects the ongoing tension surrounding appointments in the public service and the dilemma of the legal courts between total disqualification and limited regulation of focused conflicts of interest.