web analytics
December 9, 2016 / 9 Kislev, 5777

Posts Tagged ‘supreme’

Shiloh Musings: Israeli Supreme Court, When “Independent” is UNJUST

Tuesday, November 8th, 2016

So what is the big hullabaloo between Israeli Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked and Supreme Court President Miriam Naor all about?

One of the big issues in Israel is that the Supreme Court is very much “friend brings friend.” It’s a Leftist bastion that easily preserves its ideological purity. Breaking that monopoly is an aim of Shaked and her party, Jewish Home aka NRP. It’s also important to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and many others in Israel’s Right and Center, which is why she got that portfolio.

On one of the Israeli newscasts about the issue, I heard someone who wants to preserve the status quo shouting that it exists to preserve the “court’s independence.” Now, if you don’t know what they mean by “independence,” you may think they have a point.

The dangerous thing that the pro-status quo people mean by that is that they do not make their decisions based on the laws passed in the Knesset.  And remember that the Knesset is made up by representatives of political parties voted in by the citizens of the State of Israel. The justices in the Israeli Supreme Court consider their “consciences,” their ideologies to be the sources of their decisions. They do not make their judgments by interpreting the Laws, but by bending them into their concept of their Leftist Utopian vision.

If Ayelet Shaked gets her way, then the Knesset will appoint justices more representative of Israel’s population and not the Leftist elite of today which considers itself the overseer of Israeli Law and values, even going against laws which they don’t like.

Batya Medad

A Supreme Act Of Love Revisited

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

Nineteen years ago, in the December 12, 1997 issue, The Jewish Press published in “Lessons in Emunah” a text I wrote entitled “A Supreme Act of Love.”

It was about the story of a young boy, during WWII, in Nazi Occupied France, who was learning for his upcoming bar mitzvah in 1944 in the Shul of Brive-la-Gaillarde (Corrèze) in France.

My Father, Harav David Feuerwerker, zt”l, was the rabbi of the city and in charge of three French Departments (Corrèze, Creuse and Lot).

I had heard the story many times from my mother but I had no idea who this young boy was.

He was arrested in the Shul together with several other Jews, including my aunt, Rose Warfman (Rose Gluck at the time), by the Gestapo. All those arrested were put on a flat open truck and taken away. Then, someone pointed to the young boy’s mother walking on the street. Amazingly, the young boy didn’t call out to his mother. By doing so, I wrote, he saved, at that very moment, her life.

Who was this young boy? What happened to his mother?

A while ago, I came upon handwritten notes from my father. There in a list of people from Brive (Brive-la-Gaillarde is often called more simply Brive), I saw a name, unknown to me, which I researched: Najberg. I looked up in the book The Memorial of the Deportation of Jews from France by the French Nazi hunter, Serge Klarsfeld, published in 1978, which I possess, and found that there was a Robert Najberg, born on June 29, 1931, in Lens.

It had to be the young boy, the age corresponding to 12!

I searched further on the Internet and found that Robert Najberg was born in Lens, Pas-de-Calais, France, in a Jewish family of Polish origin. Another name I found in the handwritten notes of my father was Bindefeld. I searched for information about him. He was Nathan (Nachman) Bindefeld, the Hazzan, who was teaching Robert Najberg for his bar mitzvah. I found in Klarsfeld’s book that Nachman Bindefeld was born on June 25, 1906, in Frankfurt-am-Main, in Germany. I found out about the fate of both the teacher and his student.

Nachman Bindefeld was deported from the Drancy internment camp (next to Paris) to either Kaunas (Lithuania) or Tallinn (Estonia) by the Convoy No. 73, of May 15, 1944, where he was killed. He was 38 years old.

Robert Najman was deported from Drancy internment camp to Auschwitz concentration camp, by the next convoy, Convoy No. 74, of May 20, 1944, and killed upon his arrival, on May 25, 1944. He was 12 years old, soon to become bar mitzvah.

My aunt, Rose Gluck, a nurse and member of the French Resistance, was deported from Drancy internment camp to Auschwitz concentration camp, on an earlier convoy, Convoy No. 72, of April 29, 1944. She survived both Auschwitz and Gross-Rosen concentration camps. Her story is known around the world.

Recently, she has seen one account published as a chapter of the book by Renée Worch: Holocaust Heroines. Four Teenagers’ Stories of Courage and Miraculous Survival (Feldheim).

Rose Warfman passed away this year on Shabbat Parashat Ki Teitzei (14 Elul /September 17), in Manchester, England, a few days short of reaching the age of 100.

On the train taking Nachman Bindefeld to Eastern Europe to be killed was my uncle, Dr. Salomon Gluck, a physician and member of the French Resistance, who was also killed. He was 29 years old.

What happened to Robert Najberg’s mother? I have no clue; I can’t find any information.

The 1978 edition of Klarsfeld’s book gives the lists of deportees convoy after convoy. You have to go through one after another to find the names.

In 2012, Serge Klarsfeld published an updated version of his work, with corrections and additional information with one great improvement, according to me: all the names are listed alphabetically, which makes it easier to consult. It is a huge and heavy folio. There are only 1000 copies printed of that work, and Klarsfeld was kind enough to give me a copy.

There is only one other Najberg listed in the deportees from France. Mordko Najberg, born on April 23, 1899, in Bialoczow, who was living in Malemort (Corrèze), next to Brive.

He was detained in a camp in Marseille. He was then deported to Drancy internment camp and from there to Majdanek concentration camp by Convoy 51, of March 6, 1943. He was 44 years old.

In passing, I just saw news published about Bialoczow, a village in the district of Opoczno, by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), dated April 1, 1929: “Purim Play Leads to Anti-Semitic Disturbance in Polish Village.” Did this event push Mordko Najberg to leave Poland for France? I can’t answer that question.

It seems that Mordko Najberg was the father of Robert Najberg. If so, it means that only his mother was still free at the time.

The fact that Robert Najberg’s mother is not listed among the deportees from France, can be interpreted, until proven wrong, that she was not deported.

Who was she? What happened to her? I have no answers.

It seems that she survived and that her son, 12 years old, saved her life. A supreme act of love.

Dr. Elie Feuerwerker

Supreme Court President Pulls Gun on Justice Minister over Appointments Veto

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

Supreme Court President Justice Miriam Naor on Thursday sent a harsh letter to Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi), informing her that she and her colleagues on the bench will no longer discuss with her their proposals for new judicial nominees as long as Shaked persists in promoting a law that deprives the Court of the right to veto those appointments.

Justice Naor was referring to a bill proposed by three Yisrael Beiteinu MKs — Robert Ilatov, Oded Forer, and Sofa Landver — which she attributed to Shaked, based on media reports, and based on the fact that the Justice Minister had not rejected the bill nor its timing.

The bill proposes changing the voting requirement of the nine-member Judicial Appointments Committee to what it had been before 2008, when a Likud minister, Gideon Sa’ar, instituted the need for a special majority to decide a Supreme Court appointment: 7 out of 9 committee members, or 2 less than the number of members in attendance (6 out of 8, 5 out of 7). The Supreme Court is represented by three committee members, which gives it enormous leverage in deciding appointments by special majority, but not so much if the committee reverts to the simple majority requirement.

The bill comes just ahead of the parliamentary year of 2017, when as many as four out of the 15 Supreme Court justices will be retiring, to be replaced by the Shaked-chaired appointments committee.

Justice Na’or’s rage was outright Chekhovian: “Submitting the bill at this time is tantamount to putting a gun on the table,” she wrote the Justice Minister (who represents the will of millions of Israeli voters). “It means that should some committee members not agree with the appointment of certain candidates in a manner that would not facilitate their appointment by a special majority, the constitutional rules of the game would be changed so that they may be appointed by a simple majority.”

Meaning, the Supreme court could be forced by the sovereign, the Israeli public, to accept among its numbers justices with whom they may disagree ideologically. Imagine the scandal…

Na’or added that under such circumstances she and the rest of the high court members of the committee will cease all communications with the Justice Minister over future appointments.

Na’or’s imagery of putting a gun on the table likely referenced Russian playwright Anton Chekhov’s famous quote: “If you say in the first chapter that there is a gun hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off.” In other words, it’s a warning to the pesky Shaked that she may have started something she’d regret.

It could also be a reference to Eli Wallach’s character Tuco in “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” (1966), who said: “When you have to shoot, shoot. Don’t talk. Don’t stand around trying to talk him to death.”

Or it could be a reference to Russian roulette, a lethal game of chance in which a player places a single round in a revolver, spins the cylinder, places the muzzle against their head, and pulls the trigger.

The Justice Minister’s office issued a response statement saying, “Judicial Selection Committee meeting will continue as scheduled. In the coming days we will publish the list of Supreme Court candidates.”

Advantage Shaked.

JNi.Media

Report: Justice Minister ‘Simplifying’ Supreme Court Appointments

Tuesday, November 1st, 2016

Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) is working on changing the process of appointing Supreme Court justices, according to a Tweet by journalist Amit Segal (Channel 2 News). According to Segal, Shaked is using the good services of MK Robert Ilatov (Yisrael Beiteinu), promoting a new bill that eliminates the need for a special majority to appoint Supreme Court judges, and also eliminates the need for approval for the appointments from the sitting members of the Supreme Court.

According to Segal, Shaked has informed both Court President Miriam Naor and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of the move, which comes ahead of the replacement of a quarter of the high court judges.

Israel’s constitutional law on selecting judges assigns the appointments of new judges to a nine-member Judicial Appointments Committee, as follows:

The committee is headed by the Justice Minister (Shaked), as well as one other minister chosen by the government — the most recent choice has been Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon (Kulanu). It also includes two MKs, traditionally one from the coalition and the other from the opposition — however, currently they are MK Nurit Koren (Likud) and Robert Ilatov (Yisrael Beiteinu), the latter, having been in the opposition earlier, has now moved over with his boss, Avigdor Liberman, to the coalition. To remind you, Ilatov is the author of the new proposed rules for picking new judges.

In addition there are two members of the Bar (this time one is Jewish, the other Arab), the president of the high court and two high court judges.

The committee requires a simple majority to appoint judges below the Supreme Court level; but a law enacted by then Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar in 2008 requires a special majority of 7 out of 9 committee members, or 2 fewer than the overall number of members in attendance (6 out of 8, 5 out of 7).

Historically, the three Supreme Court representatives aligned with the members of the Bar, as well as with the opposition MK, to push their own candidates, and the special majority requirement guaranteed their ability to torpedo the ones of whom they disapproved. Shaked is looking to erase this unfair advantage, then use the fact that both MKs on the committee are from the coalition to appoint four rightwing judges in 2017, with a simple 5-4 majority.

David Israel

FATCA is Here to Stay Regardless of Israel’s Supreme Court’s Temporary

Wednesday, September 7th, 2016

{Special to The Jewish Press Online}

If you think that the order by Israel’s Supreme Court to delay the release of personal financial information to the Americans will last, ask yourself:

Do you really think Israel will jeopardize its relationship with the United States to protect information about Americans’ accounts here that those Americans are supposed to be reporting to the IRS anyway?

While the case is waiting to be heard, it is possible to project two possible outcomes:

1. The Court won’t let its citizens’ financial privacy jeopardize its overall relationship with America and will in good faith transfer information that law-abiding dual citizens should have been reporting anyway.

2. The Court will prioritize the personal privacy of Israel’s citizens and block the transfer of information, which will potentially create a 30% withholding penalty of U.S. transactions by Israeli financial firms.

Israel’s Supreme Court Trying to Stop Privacy Violations

“Israel’s highest court has temporarily blocked the government from transferring the financial information of every American citizen to the U.S. Treasury in accordance with FATCA regulations, pending a September 12 hearing contending the regulation is unfair,” reports The Jewish Press.

“Unfair regulation?” Probably. But ultimately, the transfer of financial information is a major policy goal of the Obama administration. They’ve been successful at getting bastions of confidentiality, including Switzerland, perhaps the most secret banking jurisdiction of all, to hand over details of its American clients to the U.S. government, so why should Israel be any different?

Countries not cooperating with America’s imperial FATCA decree (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) include real winners like Afghanistan, Botswana, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Does Israel belong on this list?

What Americans in Israel Need to Do

American tax-payers have been required for years to submit an FBAR (Foreign Bank Account Report) to the United States, informing the government of accounts held outside the U.S. Those who don’t file are subject to harsh penalties.

Many have decided that the risk of non-compliance and the hassle of being kicked out of their banks has made investing in Israel – or anywhere in the world

other than the United States – too much trouble. On the other hand, they’ve also discovered that brokerage firms and banks in America don’t want to open accounts for them either. As a result of an October 1, 2016 deadline implemented by some big U.S. brokerage firms, many clients have had to move their investment relationships somewhere else. They’ve been left in a lurch, since they can’t invest normally in Israel, and their American firm has locked them out.

How to Open a U.S. Account from Israel

In my office in Jerusalem where we help people in Israel with their U.S. investment, IRA (Individual Retirement Accounts), and brokerage accounts, we’ve seen a great demand for guidance about how to open a U.S. brokerage account when you don’t live in the United States. We even produced an online toolkit to give people the resources they need to solve the problem. Anyone can download the toolkit for free by clicking here.

Since I deal with investments, I’m not a constitutional law expert, so I can’t predict the outcome of the current Supreme Court case in Israel. However, given the fact that Israel signed a deal with the United States in 2014 to engage in information sharing, and since banking centers around the world, from Australia and Brazil to the United Kingdom and the Vatican have made FATCA a norm in the banking world, I don’t think that this court case will do anything more than delay implementation for a short time.

What should you do now?

Americans overseas need to get their financial affairs set up properly and transparently (learn how to do this here) and they need to speak with their accountants to make sure that they are in compliance with all tax reporting obligations.

Some people describe the FATCA information sharing agreement as “Google for the tax authorities.” They will simply type your name into a search engine and find out everything about you. Though we may have philosophical disagreements about the sanctity of privacy, the reality is that there is none.

Doug Goldstein, CFP®

Meretz Chairwoman Forced Supreme Court to Work on Shabbat

Sunday, September 4th, 2016

Meretz Chairwoman MK Zahava Galon forced the Israeli Supreme Court to desecrate Shabbat, with an appeal which was already irrelevant when she filed it, argued pundit, author and Holocaust scholar Itamar Levin in a column he published on the News1 website.

Galon appealed to the court on Shabbat day, Sept. 3, asking that it order the Ministry of Transport to carry out the scheduled works on the Railroad infrastructure which had been halted on Friday night due to Haredi party pressure. “This meant that the employee on call at the reception had to receive the appeal and pass it to the Justice on call, which happened to be Anat Baron,” Levin wrote, suggesting this could also mean that the people on call in the Justice’s chambers had to work on Shabbat as well.

But, as turns out from the Justice’s ruling, also given on Shabbat, the appeal was not urgent and did not justify forcing a state employee to desecrate Shabbat. Justice Baron wrote: “The appeal was submitted today, Shabbat day, at 3 PM. When it was submitted, the infrastructure works had been ceased yesterday, following the prime minister’s order shortly before the start of Shabbat. Under these circumstances there is no point in issuing the requested injunction in response to a situation which the appellant claims was created on this weekend.”

Justice Baron instead ordered the State to respond by Monday, Sept. 5, to Galon’s appeal for an injunction — an appeal she could have submitted Saturday night, Levin wrote.

Israeli courts, including the Supreme Court, maintain skeletal Shabbat and Holiday shifts to respond to the most urgent needs. These include police requests for injunctions to prevent the smuggling of children, or for arrest warrants. But Levin wrote that he did not recall any other time when the Supreme Court was compelled to desecrate Shabbat to deal with an administrative issue such as the works on the railroad.

JNi.Media

Sharp Rightwing Criticism of Supreme Court Ruling on Demolishing Gush Etzion Homes

Friday, September 2nd, 2016

Following a Supreme Court Ruling Thursday ordering the evacuation and demolition of 17 structures in the Netiv Ha’Avot outpost in Gush Etzion, rightwing politicians called for a Regulation Act that would set out to legalize thousands of Judea and Samaria properties about which there are now or may be future claims. The general outline of the proposed regulatory legislation will authorize the Israeli government to compel proven claimants to receive market-value compensations, in comparable land or in money. A coalition move back in July to start work on the Regulation Act was thwarted by the AG Avihay Mandelblitt, who said the law is not constitutional and would be knocked down by the high court on appeal.

Thursday’s ruling, by a three-judge panel, evoked sharp criticism on the right, with Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett condemning the ruling, saying extreme leftwing elements who have given up on their ability to ever persuade the people to accept a Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria are bypassing the public and usurping the legal system to force their policies on the majority. “When the Supreme Court collaborates with them this erodes the public trust in the court,” Bennett warned.

Minister Zeev Elkin (Likud), who is a resident of Gush Etzion, said the high court’s “scandalous decision” constitutes the crossing of red lines, revealing the court’s utter disconnection from common sense and from the historic values and the legacy of the nation of Israel. Elkin called on Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (Habayit Hayehudi) to lead a far-reaching reform to regain the public’s trust in the Supreme Court.

Thursday’s ruling was an uncompromising order to destroy homes that “were built illegally on private lands.” Considering the fact that the ruling required forcing residents out of their homes, and the large number of homes in question, Court President Justice Miriam Naor gave government and the residents 18 months to prepare for the evacuation/demolition.

Naor wrote that the court ignored on principle the fact that the outpost had been established with government endorsement and support, saying government does not enjoy a special status when it comes to standing before the high court. “In the judicial process government is equal to other litigants,” Naor emphasized, adding that the fact that government had been aiding in a long-term illegal enterprise does not make it kosher.

According to the petition by Peace Now, which dug up the Arabs who are now claiming to be the original owners of Netiv Ha’Avot, the lands of the Al-Khader village near Bethlehem and Gush Etzion, in Judea, had been undergoing regulation by the Jordanian government at the time the IDF conquered the land in June 1967. The Israeli court opted not to rule whether or not the Jordanian government had the legal authority to carve up and hand out the land to local Arabs, land it had acquired through an act of war, invading the “West Bank,” including Jewish Gush Etzion, in 1948.

Davidi Pearl, who heads the Gush Etzion Regional Council, responded to the High Court’s decision saying the court had opted to belittle the government which had presented a vast array of legal alternatives that had been confirmed by the AG. Pearl called on the government to act immediately to enact a law to protect the honor of the Israeli government and the Judea and Samaria residents who had acted in good faith with the government’s encouragement.

JNi.Media

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/sharp-rightwing-criticism-of-supreme-court-ruling-on-demolishing-gush-etzion-homes/2016/09/02/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: