Here it is., Statements made by candidates for public office may be relevant to the examination of their suitability for the position, and in particular to examine the fear that they will find it difficult to exercise their powers in a matter-of-fact manner, With equality and impartiality, or that the appointmentָם will harm the public's trust in the body in which they will serve. This does not mean that every controversial statement leads to the disqualification of the candidacy; For the purpose of this determination, it is necessary to examine, among other things, the nature of the statement, the circumstances of its hearing, and the degree of its overall impact on the candidate's suitability for the appointment (compare and see: Matter Petrushka, in paragraph 25; עניין Schussheim, at paragraphs 19-20). Accordingly, this means that statements and other data that radiate on the character of a particular candidate and on the possibility that the public will trust his decisions, constitute an essential part of the relevant factual basis that is expected to be presented to the decision makers. And all of this is naturally in accordance with the nature of the position in which we are concerned.
- In this context, the obvious must be stated: it is clear that every private person has the right to express himself in public and freely, even when it comes to expressions of an unusual, outrageous or infuriating nature. This was discussed in the past, my colleague Justice Stein in a different context, in his holding that:
"Whenever his expression does not amount to a criminal offense or a civil tort and does not create a near certainty of real harm to society, his autonomy as a free person is found in the Dalat [...] Alongside the fact that this right is part of the autonomous space of every free person, its realization has considerable social value. Exceptional, outrageous, insulting, and angry expressions make an important contribution to the existence of free, unthreatened, and undictated discourse" (HCJ 7150/16 The Reform Center for Religion and State The Movement for Progressive Judaism in Israel v. Minister of Justice, paragraphs 3,4-3,3 (September 21,2020)).