- Finally, I do not share my colleague's self-criticism of this Court and its warning regarding the many cases that come before us, in which urgent temporary remedies of delaying the Authority's action are requested. The rulings regarding the granting of temporary injunctions and interim orders have been rooted in this Court for many years, and the presumption of administrative correctness is before our eyes. Each case is examined by the judges of this Court according to its circumstances and implications, so that Israel has not been widowed. This has been done in our case as well, taking into account the fact that at the center of the proceeding was the question of עצם The convening of the committee, an issue that was Redundant by itself if an appropriate interim relief had not been granted. In fact, even the result that we have reached shows in retrospect the thinking of this remedy - for had it not been for the waiting for our decision, it can be assumed that the convening of the committee would have progressed without examining the possibility of a shortened proceeding, an alternative that is of great importance from the perspective of preserving the independence of the officeholders. I have not found any reference to this in the words of my colleague.
| Yitzhak Amit
נשיא
|
Judge Alex Stein:
- The judgment of my colleague, President Amit, is acceptable to me.
- I would like to add and clarify two things:
- The possibility that the Civil Service Commissioner, as the head of the committee that discussed the dismissal of a senior officer, would determine, procedurally, a two-stage process of decision-making by the committee was not raised or discussed in the previous proceeding. This possibility is consistent with the judge's opinion Y. Elron And with my own opinion. The Judge Elron And I have determined that the Commissioner There is no authority to delete the dismissal process out of hand which is brought before him by the minister in charge, and that the entire committee is the one that must formulate and make any substantive decision in such a matter. This legal determination will therefore continue to stand, with the addition of the clarification that concerns a two-stage discussion set by the President.
- As to the nature of the lack of trust in the relationship between a senior officer and the appointing minister, as a reason for the dismissal of the officer - this matter was not the bone of contention in the proceeding that preceded the current additional hearing. I will say briefly that the existence of objective evidence that shows that the Minister and the officer are unable to work together and serve the public, for a long period of time, may also provide the "objective test" that my colleague the President spoke of in his present judgment. Subject to this, I agree with the President's determination that there is no room for us to adopt a pure "subjective test" as a ground for the dismissal of a senior officer by the Minister. The adoption of such a "subjective test" is liable to severely harm the independence of the public service (and it seems to me that the judge Elron In any event, there was no intention to adopt such a test in the judgment that is the subject of the present proceeding).
- In addition, after reading the opinion of my colleague, Vice President Sohlberg, I concur with his comments regarding the work of the Legal Advisor to the Government in this case.
Alex SteinJudge
|