29
to alternative forms of participation: both street demonstrations in front of the Knesset
in Jerusalem and public petitions to the HCJ, located merely a few meters away.
The HCJ - in this perspective - posits a sharp contrast to the other two
governmental branches; first, the nature of its nomination procedures - Supreme Court
Justices are being selected by a special nine-members’ Judicial Appointments
Committee, wherein professional legal representatives outnumber politically elected
members and merits, professional factors govern selection (Edelman, 1992). As
second factor serves, the level of public faith it enjoys: the HCJ is perceived by
Israelis to be a trustworthy institution, one which is neutral and which protects the
public from arbitrary decisions, (Barzilai et all. 1994; Barzilai 1997). Whereas high
courts generally enjoy high levels of public legitimacy (Gibson et al. 1998), the
support of the HCJ exceeds that of other high courts (Peres & Ya’ar 1998). Third –
and finally - the common public perception of its accessibility, professionalism and
non-partisanship: Supreme Court Judges are assigned additional sensitive public roles,
like heading Public Commissions of Inquiry, or scrutinizing evidence declared
privileged by the Minister of Defense. The Court also earned a perceived notion of
accessibility, derived from the lax operationalization of threshold barriers’ doctrines
like standing and justiciability (Hofnung 1996a).
Be it fruit of either myths or facts - in the eyes of Israelis the Court represents
all that the legislature and executive are not, and offers opportunities they do not. In
search for a voice, the public takes its grievances to the streets and to the courthouse.
VIII. Conclusion
Two competing theories have emerged in conceptualizing litigation as political
participation and the linkage the former sustains with various forms of the latter: the
Convention