The Institute of Criminology: A Jewel within the Law Faculty

The Institute of Criminology was established as an integral part of the Faculty of Law * Every year, the Institute produces leading scholars in the field * We bring you a brief introduction to the Institute, the programs it offers, criminology in general and the dynamics between research and practice    

The Institute of Criminology was founded by Professor Israel Drapkin in the late 1950s, and is considered one of the longest-standing institutes in the world and the leader in its field in Israel. The faculty of the Institute includes outstanding criminologists, including recipients of the Israel Prize and the Stockholm Prize. The Institute currently offers MA and PhD programs, but is preparing to expand the curriculum and offer a BA program from the 2014-15 academic year. The Institute has some 200 students in three MA tracks: a research track with a thesis, a theoretical track without a thesis, and a practical track specializing in law enforcement. The Institute is also home to a group of MA and doctorate research students participating in its “Full Time” program.

The Full Time Student Program 

Intended for outstanding doctorate and MA students, this scholarship program provides students with a supportive environment while requiring them to devote most of their time and energy to research and other academic activities. In addition to working on their thesis or dissertation, these students work as teaching and/or research assistants. Their involvement in research projects led by faculty members often gives them the opportunity to make intellectual contributions that result in publications in peer-reviewed journals.

This program was created in response to one of the main challenges facing students for advanced degrees in Israel. “The average Israeli doctoral student completes his/her degree when s/he is already over the the age of 30. This is the average for Israelis who have served in the army. By contrast, a doctorate student abroad can graduate at the age of 25, creating unfair competition. Israeli doctoral students are thus preoccupied by the need to make a living and start a family.

Dr. Badi Hasisi, the head of the Institute

The net result is that it is far from easy to be a student for advanced degrees in Israel.” This explanation is offered by Dr. Badi Hasisi, the head of the Institute. The program creates a working environment that has produced a new generation of scholars who have later joined the Institute itself as faculty members or undertook post-doctorate studies abroad. Dr. Hasisi explains the rationale behind the initiative: “We make a considerable investment in this group, but this investment is definitely worthwhile. As we see it, one of the Institute’s tasks is to train brilliant and strong students who can later find a place in the Israeli academic community.” 

Tamar Bernblum, 34, is a student in the program and warmly recommends it: “I’ve met many doctoral students and I'm familiar with the different study tracks at the university. Doctorate studies can be a very lonely experience, and this program helps us build a peer group.” From a logistic perspective, the program provides office space, a computer and other equipment that meet the basic needs of the student. “We are treated as an integral part of the Institute,” Tamar emphasizes. “The program enables us to meet lecturers from around the world. In addition to providing a platform for learning, this also enables us to make connections and create personal opportunities,” she notes with satisfaction. Alongside the organizational platform provided by the Institute, the doctorate students cooperate among themselves in writing articles and help each other on a regular basis. “Naturally, friendships are formed. This is an experience that not all doctoral students at the university get to enjoy.”

Tamar Bernblum

In addition to a scholarship, participants in the program also have a chance to gain experience in teaching and research. “In this respect they address all our needs and help us build an academic career by means of the doctorate itself, as well as through teaching and research,” Tamar explains. “Every doctorate program in the university should try to meet this model, which I believe is very successful.”

Criminology as an Interdisciplinary Science 

Dr. Hasisi explains that criminology is an inherently interdisciplinary field. “The most important and groundbreaking studies in criminology are the ones that connect criminology with other fields.” In the law enforcement track, for example, a dialogue between the different areas involved in the field is vital. “A dialogue does not always take place between people from different institutions, for example between staff from the Israel Prison Service and police officers, despite the fact that these two agencies have important impact on each other’s work,” Dr. Hasisi argues. He notes that while not every academic field can be translated into policy, criminology has a strong affinity to both policy and theory. “Someone may undertake an interesting study on the impact of poverty on society, but it would not lead to significant change in society at large because it relates to sweeping changes that would be difficult to effect. The units of analysis are by their nature to broad and are on macro level,” he explains. Conversely, some studies in criminology address specific mechanisms on an “intermediate” level and can thus lead to real change, for example policies for enforcement, penalization and rehabilitation.

Research is the vanguard of the Institute, and motivating scholars to publish studies in top peer-reviewed journals is an extremely important factor. However, members of the Institute also maintain close associations with the law enforcement system and see their work as an opportunity to influence society. “We advance the field of research, publish studies and receive competitive research grants,” Dr. Hasisi explains. “We also believe that this education has a functional dimension, particularly for policy makers, such as senior police officers.” He claims that if a police officer hears an explanation of basic facts based on relevant research, this can influence the way the officer behaves in the field. Academics at the Institute recently received a substantial research grant for a study for the Israeli Prison Service, evaluating its existing rehabilitation programs and examining whether these programs lead to positive outcomes.

At the same time, the Institute also strives to develop the criminology community in Israel. “The biennial conference of the Israeli Society of Criminology, which was held last May, was run independently by the ISC for the first time. Professor David Weisburd, the former head of the Institute, serves as the president of the ISC, and the Hebrew University was the institution responsible for leading the conference.” Dr. Hasisi also notes the close and fruitful dialogue between the Institute and the global academic community. Criminologists from leading programs overseas visit the Institute, reinforcing its ties with the international community in the field.

All the World’s a Stage

Many people have noted the similarity between the theater stage and the courtroom * For eight years the Faculty has run a theater workshop that illustrates this connection in practical terms * The butterflies in the stomach of a prosecutor or defense attorney as they stand before the judge are very similar to those of an actor about to go out in front of the audience * The participants in the workshop gained two academic credit points – and enjoyed a once-in-a-lifetime experience

The Workshop 
Students who wish to participate in the theater workshop undergo preliminary screening by the workshop leaders, including Bentzi Faber and Shlomit Ben-Menachem. Over the academic year the workshop is led by an academic team and a professional theater team who work in cooperation with one another. On the academic side, the participants develop their critical examination of the legal system of which they themselves will later form part. At the end of a process that includes discussions, practical exercises, and reading rulings and other material, the students formulate their key conclusions from this experience. On the creative side, the participants prepare a production that aims to present their critique at eye level to legal and non-legal spectators alike.

In rehearsal

The work includes an introduction to the world of theater, different theatrical genres, improvisation classes, character work and other experiences. The goal is to connect the average law student with the thespian world. At the end of the process, and under the supervision of the team leaders, the participants write their own dramatic work based on their life experiences and present it to an audience including Faculty students and the general public.

This year’s play was staged on June 4, 2013 at Mazia House of Theater and was based on several scenes from The Crucible (by Arthur Miller). A group of eight actresses created an analogy between witches and criminals, including in terms of societal attitudes, as a basis for a discussion of crime. The group struggled to understand who is a criminal, how crime is created, and whether society is responsible. Shlomit Ben-Menachem, the assistant director, explains: “One of the goals of the workshop is to put yourself in the other’s shoes – a skill that is very important for those in the legal profession: to play the role and to stay in character. We all think that we would never become criminals, but what makes me say that and how can I be so confident? People who turned to crime also never imagined that they would do so,” Shlomit adds.

2013 Theater play

Breaking the Routine
Sapir Efron, 25, is a second-year student who chose to join the workshop in order to add some spice to her academic routine. “I found it difficult to concentrate on my studies all the time, and after the first year I wanted a break from the daily routine of frontal classes,” she explains. Sapir adds that she had not appeared on stage since her sixth-grade graduating party. Nevertheless, she decided to take the plunge and join the workshop. She does not regret her decision: “It’s been a real breath of fresh air for me. It energizes me and puts me in a good mood. There’s a great atmosphere in the workshop and I’ve made some wonderful friends I’m very fond of. I don’t think we would have been so open with each other in any other situation,” she suggests. As well as offering a break from routine, Sapir has also found the workshop useful on the academic front: “We touch in issues that we have studied in various courses in the Faculty. For example, I’m taking a course on manslaughter offenses, and in one class I just sat there and connected almost everything the lecturer was saying with our play.” Sapir summarizes her experience to date in the workshop: “I feel that the workshop has been an eye opener in many ways. It has enriched me and added real value to my week. At the moment we are writing texts and participating in long rehearsal sessions. It isn’t always easy, and sometimes it feels a bit much to combine this with all my other assignments, but it’s interesting and challenging. And the final outcome is something unique that comes from ourselves.”

Theater play 2012

Behind the Scenes 
Dr. Anat Horowitz, a Faculty member, has served as the academic instructor for the workshop for the past two years, working alongside Professor Hanina Ben-Menachem, who founded the program. The function of the academic instructor is to present the participants with legal themes, which they then attempt to express in theatrical terms in order to deepen their understanding of the issues. “The instructor does not impose one specific theme on the group, but usually presents the dialogue between theater and law in a general way, and then illustrates it by means of several themes. Through the discussion, each groups sees which themes it finds interesting and where it has something to say,” Horowitz explains. She adds: “I think this is an amazing project that allows for unique learning on many levels. Like any art, the theater has its own language, enabling the expression of ideas and thoughts about law in way that cannot be achieved through the conventional means and tools used in the Faculty.” She also mentions other benefits of the workshop, such as enhancing the students’ ability to appear before an audience, the use of body language, and the ability to enter into another character by playing a role in a play. All these skills are also important for future attorneys.

Competitions and Emissaries

Every year the Faculty sends students to represent the university and Israel in international competitions * Key events include the Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition and the ICC Moot Court Competition * Some of the participants share their experiences in the competitions and explain how they prepared for the events

Jessup
The Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition is a prestigious competition in the field of international public law that has been held for over 50 years. Every year some 600 teams from law faculties in over 80 countries participate in the competition. Teams from the Faculty have represented Israel in Washington DC for the past seven years. Last year, the Faculty team reached the quarter final and ended among the eight leading teams in the world.

Yonatan Horowitz, a third-year student, participated in the recent contest and agreed to share his experiences with us. The entire process takes four or five months, during which time groups of about five students prepare their statement of claim and engage in real research. “In international law, many of the disputes relate to the question of what is law – is it establishes custom, international treaties, and so forth?” Yonatan explains. “Around September, they publish a case involving a dispute between two countries.” Yonatan notes that the competition organizers make sure that the subjects are relevant. This year, for example, the case related to three general issues: climate change, state debts, and migration issues. The writing assignments and the competition itself take place in English. After submitting their statements of claim, the participants begin to prepare for the national competition against the College of Management Academic Studies; the winning team then continues on to the international competition. “In the oral arguments stage, you stand up and present your arguments for 20 minutes in front of three judges who ask lots of questions and try to trip you up. Accordingly, it isn’t enough to just learn your own argument – you also have to know all the surrounding material,” Yonatan emphasizes. 

Yonatan Horowitz and the Judges

Yonatan notes that students who participate in the program must be capable of constructing a coherent argument. They also need good English and should be capable of engaging in serious legal research. The critical factor for success in the competition, Yonatan feels, is willingness to invest and make sacrifices. “It takes away some of your time with family and friends and it affects your investment in other courses,” he admits. “People who decide to participate must be willing to pay the price. On the other hand, I think it’s the most challenging thing you can be involved in. I learned things that I don’t think I would have learned anywhere else in the Faculty.”

Yonatan reveals that the work process is anything but simple. “Sometimes it can get frustrating when you are trying unsuccessfully to find something. Sometimes you just feel that you aren’t good enough and you’re letting your team down.” This is where the importance of teamwork comes into play. “The team supports you and carries you along. It’s very important that the members of the team get on, because this is a very intensive process. In our group we really liked each other and we got on well, both professional and socially.” In addition to the friendships they made, the competitors also gained in other ways from their experience: “We all saw an amazing improvement in our ability to speak in public. Although English is not my native language and it was harder for me than for others, once you’ve been doing something for six months you develop your capabilities,” Yonatan concludes.

The Moot Court Competition of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The Moot Court Competition is held in The Hague, under the inspiration of the ICC. The participants are required to play the roles of victims, prosecution and defense before global experts in international criminal law, including judges from the ICC itself, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and academics. In the 2012-13 academic year, the Hebrew University participated in the competition for the second time. Its team finished in fifth place, out of 26 teams that reached the international final stage.

Adam Shahaf, the assistant coach for the 2012-13 team, explains that “the competition began several years ago on the initiative of a lecturer from Pace University in New York who wanted to encourage students to study international law.” The competition has provoked considerable interest among academics from the field of international criminal law, who see it as an opportunity to exert influence from their standpoints. The participation of our Faculty in the competition was initiated by the Minerva Center, which also provides academic supervision and logistical services for the process. “In November,” Shahaf explains, “they publish a fictitious case extending over a good few pages and combining a wide range of issues. The document simulates the procedural stage in court.” After the case has been published, the team begins to prepare for the international competition itself, which takes place in The Hague in April. “We begin with three statements of claim – defense, prosecution and a third party. The third party is usually the victim, but sometimes it is a state arguing that the case should be heard before a domestic court rather than in the ICC.” During the first three days of the competition, a preliminary round is held in which the teams draw lots and compete in “mini-matches” with two other teams each time. At the end of this stage, the nine best teams go on to the final. After the final, the students tour the ICTY and other tribunals.

The rehearsal

Shahaf participated in the program last year, and this year served as assistant to team coach Dr. Rotem Giladi. In addition to the material addressed by the ICC, which is interesting in its own right, Shahaf explains that the competition offers a particularly interesting kind of learning. The practical goal of winning the competition adds a real edge to the process of writing the claims. “This is a wonderful experience that teaches you in the best possible way how to engage in legal research. I can still remember the main rulings in the area I researched, which key thinkers I needed to quote, and the main connections in my legal argument,” Shahaf reveals.

Sharon Aviram, 25, a first-year student, spoke as the team’s representative for the victims. Sharon was drawn to the competition because of her love of international law. As in the Jessop competition, Sharon is careful to emphasize the sacrifices expected of the participants. “The aspect of independent work requires a lot of self-discipline and cuts into your sleeping time. Sometimes it is really tough.” Sharon formulated the opening sentence she believes every student must ask themselves before joining the competition: “Ask yourself whether international law interests you – not whether it fascinates you, but whether it interests you, and whether you are willing to prioritize it over other areas.” She continues: “I appreciate the competition because I got something out of it. But for people who aren’t planning on working in this field in the future, it will come at the expense of other areas and it’s important to remember that.” Sharon describes the process as long, arduous and difficult, including many hours of work and research. With hindsight, however, “it was worth it.”

Sharon and Yulia

On the day the team left Israel there was a strike at the airport, so the experience was particularly stressful. “We arrived a day late because of the strike. Everything was crazy. But the Faculty really came through. We had almost given up hope and we were beginning to think that after all our work we wouldn’t be able to get to the competition. Then the Faculty agreed to pay for last-minute flight tickets and eventually we arrived in The Hague,” Sharon recalls with excitement. After the preliminary stage, one of the young organizers of the competition joined the table where the Israeli team was sitting. “He said, ‘Look guys, don’t take this too hard but you won’t be going on to the next stage. Don’t be offended – look on it as an experience. You’re a new team, and there are teams here that have been competing for eight years.’” This was half an hour before they were due to announce who was going on to the semi final, and we all put our heads down in despair,” Sharon admits. “We were stunned to see our name in the list of teams who qualified to the semi-final. At seven o’clock in the evening our team received the statement of claims of the other teams that had made it to the semi final, and we had to prepare ourselves by nine o’clock the next morning. It was really like a battle plan in the army,” Sharon recalls. The participants divided themselves into the different positions, and then coach Dr. Giladi came up with a creative way of strengthening the arguments of Eitan (the team’s counsel for the defense) over those of the competing groups. “Everyone was focusing on the suffering the victims had endured. Eitan didn’t dispute that, but he asked whether that was what was of interest to the court at this stage. He declared that the defendant was guilty, and let everyone begin to think that if this was the case, what was there left to say? Then he said, ‘But hold on a minute… We are in a preliminary hearing. It may be that all these events indeed happened – but does that empower the court to hear the case?’ With one sentence, Eitan knocked the wind out of the prosecutors’ sails and brought the court back to the question it was supposed to determine at this point: the issue of competence.” The team did not make it to the final the next day. However, Sharon decided to approach the judge from the semi-final stage and ask him what he thought about the team’s move. “He said that he really liked it, and that made us feel much better. It was so good that we were only two points short of reaching the final,” Sharon recalls with a smile.

Professor Yoav Dotan Discusses His Latest Book

Professor Yoav Dotan’s latest book, entitled Lawyering for the Rule of Law, will be published shortly by Cambridge University Press * We met Professor Dotan to chat about his book, which examines the transformation that occurred in the High Court of Justice Department (HCJD) of the State Attorney’s Office following Israel’s “constitutional revolution” * Does the department serve the government, the public or the court? * Professor Dotan summarizes the main conclusions from his study, and took the opportunity to reminisce about his student days   

“In the mid-1990s, I already realized that the High Court of Justice (HCJD) in the State Attorney’s Office is a kind of nerve center for decision making in many different senses.” This is the summary Professor Yoav Dotan offers for the study presented in his latest book, Lawyering for the Rule of Law, which is due to be published shortly by the prestigious Cambridge University Press. The book discusses the transformation undergone by the HCJD following the rise of judicial activism and the constitutional revolution in the Supreme Court, as well as the ways in which this change has shaped public litigation in Israel.

What is special about the HCJD?
“My interest in the department as the object of academic inquiry began some 20 years ago when I worked as an attorney in the department for a brief period after completing my doctorate. From the perspective of both the administrative authorities and the court, the department’s function extends well beyond the standard definition of representing the government or the authorities before the court. Many processes by which the High Court of Justice influences government policy are moderated or mediated by the HCJD.”

What aspects does your book focus on?
“I examine the work of the HCJD on several levels, including the constitutional and theoretical plane as well as a historical review of its development and a qualitative and empirical analysis. My study is based on a very large sample of cases from the 1970s and the 1990s. The 1980s, of course, saw considerable change in the way the High Court of Justice functions. This period, which can be referred to as the breakthrough of judicial activism, saw the removal of restrictions on legal and judicial standing, the development of the grounds of reasonableness, the expansion of judicial review, and other changes. I wanted to examine how these changes were reflected in the practices and outcomes of the court hearings on the basis of a comparison of the period before and after this era of change.

What did your study show?
“We can see a dramatic increase in the scope of litigation in the High Court of Justice between the 1970s and the 1990s. My hypothesis is that the department adapted itself both in practical and ideological terms to the new role the court defined for it in the 1980s. The department focused not only on providing optimum representation for the government but also on helping the court to expand its sphere of influence over the governmental bureaucracy.”

“Babysitting” Petitions

“In quantitative terms, the most dramatic and significant difference between the 1970s and the 1990s is the growth in petitions in which the state agrees to a settle. The jump in the rate of settlements is remarkable. We can also see changes in other aspects, such as the positions adopted by the state. In the 1990s, the initial position presented to the court by the State Attorney’s Office does not always call for the unequivocal rejection of the petition. In many cases, its position reflects a position that is independent from that of its client. This could be termed a more ‘statist’ position.”

How do you explain this difference in positions?
“I compare the outcomes of proceedings involving the HCJD with those of other authorities that are not represented by the department – mainly local authorities. In the latter case, we do not see the same process of change. I think my study shows in very clear quantitative and qualitative terms that the change that occurred in litigation was due to changes in the HCJD itself. Over the 1990s, we can see that a very wide gulf emerges, of about one to five, in the issuing of conditional decrees by the High Court of Justice against local authorities as opposed to the authorities that are represented by the HCJD. Anyone who is familiar with litigation before the High Court of Justice knows that a petition that does not secure even an conditionaldecree is one that has effectively been rejected out of hand, whereas a petition that secures such an order moves forward to a full hearing. This is a very critical point in the litigation. This shows that by comparison to petitions in which the HCJD presents its position, the court believes that the petition can be resolved without the need for a full hearing.”

This change could also lead to another de facto change, with the State Attorney’s Office moving to the front of the stage
“That’s right. One of the examples I analyze is the story of the rights of the Bedouins in the unrecognized villages in the Negev. Since the late 1990s, the High Court of Justice has virtually revolutionized government policy toward these villages. In the final analysis, this is a policy that has been directed by the HCJD.”

Can a reverse effect also be seen on the High Court of Justice?
“Today, the court itself refers to this phenomenon by means of the phrase coined by Justice Rubinstein – ‘babysitting petitions.’ The court functions as a ‘babysitter’ for the administrative authority, using a pending petition to make it adopt policy that tilts the situation in a direction that the court believes is necessary. This is far removed from our traditional perception of the court as an institution that provides immediate relief. Today, the court creates change in government policy through ongoing supervision. My argument is that the court could not do this without the cooperation of the HCJD.” [See also the interview in this issue with Supreme Court President (ret.) Dorit Beinisch, who also discusses the reasons why so many petitions are rejected or end without the need for a ruling].

Four Decades of Information

Professor Dotan has been involved in his field for many years and has collected an impressive database relating to some four decades of rulings by the High Court of Justice. Although he only began to write his latest book last year, it was preceded by a process of thorough research that is only partially reflected in the final product.

How do you set about executing such a huge task?
“I have always collected a huge quantity of data, and I continue to do so – particularly data based on the analysis of High Court of Justice cases. I examined the actual court files (and not only the electronic databases) – that’s a great deal of work. I also examined the pre-petition files (i.e. internal files of the HCJD in which the HCJD deals with petitions even before they are filed to the Court) and conducted many dozens, if not more, of in-depth interviews with attorneys from the HCJD, staff members from the State Attorney’s Office, judges, and attorneys who represented petitioners – all the players in the process. I should also take this opportunity to thank my many research assistants who spent long days in dusty archives. I won’t mention them by name, simply because there have been so many of them over the years. They were all students at our Faculty and they all performed excellent work in a thorough and responsible manner.”

What’s next?
“No promises, but I think one of my next projects will be a book about the High Court of Justice itself. I’m planning to write the book in Hebrew. If this idea goes ahead, I will be able to draw on the databases that I only used partially in the current project. But I’m not sure about it – time will tell!”

Supreme Court President Asher Grunis and Professor Yoav Dotan

Memories of Undergraduate Days

Our conversation shifts from future plans to the more distant past. Professor Dotan has a long and rich history at the Faculty of Law of the Hebrew University. He began as an undergraduate student “straight after the army – one day you’re a soldier in uniform, the next you find yourself at the Faculty,” he recalls. He came back to the Faculty for his doctorate degree, joined the Faculty and even served as dean from 2005 to 2009. During the interview we chatted about his experiences as a Faculty student and his thoughts about today’s students.

What was it like for you when you began to study in the Faculty?
“The story I usually tell new students who come to the Faculty is that the main thing I remember from my first week was being hungry all the time. I didn’t know where the cafeteria was in the building and I just walked around hungry.”

What about the studies themselves?
“Basically I remember this period as a fairly happy one. Above all I enjoyed the intellectual experience of studying with people I strongly admired and saw as intellectual giants. I found the studies eye-opening and enlightening and I really threw myself into them.”

Had you already decided at this stage that you would have an academic career?
“No, that wasn’t my plan. I think I only began to consider the academic track after I traveled to UC at Berkeley for my master’s degree. As an undergraduate student, I always assumed I would follow the usual professional track.”

What aspects of the studies themselves stick in your mind?
“Even as an undergraduate student I liked public law. My teacher for constitutional law was Shimon Shetrit, and my lecturers for administrative law was Claude Klein, assisted by Manny Mazuz, who I would meet again when I worked in the HCJD. In terms of public law I was also an autodidact – I read a lot and learned things by myself, beyond the materials we were assigned in class.”

How would you compare the atmosphere in the Faculty today compared with your time as a student?
“The atmosphere in the Faculty was a bit different from what I gather from today’s students. Today’s students often complain about excessive competitiveness, but I think that law schools are competitive almost by definition. There have been studies about this. But my experience as a student wasn’t so competitive. The atmosphere was less stressful. I don’t really understand why today’s students feel so stressed and I am trying to fight this tendency.”

How were your relations with your year class?
“Well first and foremost – I met my wife in the Faculty! I think at least 15 couples from my year class got married. Some of my best friends – people I see almost every week at social events – studied with me in the Faculty. These are friendships that have survived to this day, at least in some cases.”

Maybe that explains why the atmosphere was more relaxed
“Perhaps. There’s something irrational about the way people feel now. It isn’t as though we didn’t feel pressure from the job market. On the contrary, it was very hard to be admitted for law studies at the time, and there were only a few institutions in Israel that taught the subject – the Hebrew University, Tel Aviv and Bar Ilan. But once you’d got in, you more or less knew that you wouldn’t have a serious problem finding a position in the market.”

How about today?
“I don’t think the situation has changed, at least not for students from this Faculty. Today, too, it is not easy to be admitted. But once you’ve got in, you won’t have a problem finding an excellent position in the legal profession. That’s why I really don’t understand why we always hear this story of pressure from the students.”

What about the relationship between the students and the Faculty?
“I think that today the Faculty does quite a lot to look after its students and invests more energy, resources and attention in the average student – or in all the students, actually – than it did when I was an undergraduate. I felt I received one of the best possible legal educations here. When I went on to work as an intern, I appreciated the tools I had been given here and I was grateful to my teachers for giving me the best tools a lawyer could have. But as individual students, we didn’t feel the Faculty was particularly interested in us, beyond simply teaching us law.”

Can you think of something the Faculty offers today that didn’t exist back then?
“Sure: the placement project. We assume responsibility for placing our students in the job market, wrapped up in cotton wool. It could hardly be easier. That wasn’t the case in my day. This is a classic example, but it isn’t the only one. As a Faculty member, I must emphasize that our approach is not to see the students as a kind of nuisance. We want them to be happy and to enjoy coming the Faculty. After all, the Faculty invests a lot of time and money – certainly by comparison to my days as an undergraduate. The student experience back then was very different. Today we have a different style of doing things. We seek to give the students the feeling that they are part of the Faculty.”

Students

Who am I? Sarah Almo

Age: 23

Year: 1

The facts: Sarah immigrated to Israel from Ethiopia with her mother in 1991 and moved to Kiryat Malachi. “My mother died when I was seventeen and a half, but before she died she signed a form agreeing that I be drafted early to the army, since I had skipped a grade in school.” Sarah served as a manpower officer in the Central Command in Jerusalem, and at the same time worked with youth at risk in Kiryat Malachi. After completing a preparatory course at Tel Aviv University, she came to the Hebrew University to study law.

“I’m one of those people who know from a very early age what they want to do. I knew I was going to study and become an officer. I joined the army and didn’t claim the special conditions I could have demanded. I was a very challenging period; I learned a lot and enjoyed every minute of it,” Sarah says with a smile. Like many first-year students, Sarah is still finding her feet in the Faculty. “In my immediate surroundings I am very dominant, but here I feel a bit lost. If my girlfriends from school could see me now they say ‘What’s happened to you? Have you started taking Ritalin?!” she jokes. Sarah admits that because of her ethnicity she “stands out among the crowd,” and when she turns up for a class, people notice immediately. “The fact that I’m Ethiopian is something I’ve only really started to feel at university, simply because in Israel’s peripheral regions there are more Ethiopians. Apart from that, I don’t feel any difference. I was raised by my mother, who grew up in the city. That’s different from Ethiopians who were born in the country,” she explains.

Why law? Sarah took part in a project called Accessibility to Higher Education in the Negev – a three-year program in which school students can take courses at Ben Gurion University. “I took a course in law and I simply fell in love,” Sarah recalls. She describes her sense of outrage at seeing Chinese laborers sleeping in factories, and hearing stories from illiterate women who do not receive any explanation from their physician about the treatments they are supposed to take. “Over the years I’ve been exposed to more than a few injustices in Israeli society. I realized that people who do not know the laws or the way the bureaucracy works are abused in a cynical and shocking way,” she adds.

A second hearing: Jerusalem Day is also the memorial day for the Ethiopian Jews who died in Sudan as they tried to reach Israel. “In 1984, approximately 12,000 Ethiopian Jews began to walk from Ethiopia to Sudan. About 8,000 survived and reached Israel, but over 4,000 died on the way,” Sarah relates. Together with three other students, Sarah privately organized a memorial ceremony at the university. “It was very moving, and I hope it will become a tradition and that more students will take part.”

Who am I? Jessica Weintraub

Age: 24

Year: Master’s program

The facts: Jessica’s mother was born in Belgium and her father in Israel. Jessica came to Israel to study in the master’s program in the Faculty, and she is now specializing in intellectual property and law and technology. “I’m half Israeli, and when I’m in Israel I feel very Israeli. I’m living in Jerusalem, even though I really wanted to live in Tel Aviv,” she admits. In the final analysis Jessica is happy with her decision to move to Jerusalem: “It’s a very attractive city with lots going on. People here are very friendly.”

Why law? Jessica studied for her bachelor’s degree in Brussels, Belgium, and decided to continue her studies at the Faculty of Law in the Hebrew University. “This is a university that has a very good reputation and is ranked among the top 100 institutions in the world. Apart from that, Israel produces a very large number of patents, which is an area I’m interested in. So for me it was a good deal to study and live here,” she explains. Jessica has no trouble identifying the differences between the study methods in Brussels and Israel. “Things are more practical here. There are lots of assignments to submit and all the time you have to convince people of your own position. In Brussels you just show up to class and listen. Here you have to work every day.” Nevertheless, the hard work demanded in Israel has a good side. “Compared to Brussels, there aren’t so many examinations at the end of the year, and you aren’t flooded with information that you didn’t study over the year,” she notes. As for her Israeli fellow students: “People here are more mature and they find it easier to participate and present their arguments. Sometimes I feel that I have less experience and fewer ideas,” Jessica confesses. Since she came from the Continental legal system, she can also identify the differences in this respect. “In Brussels, when I need to study a court ruling it’s usually quite simple, and we examine it just in order to illustrate what we learned in class. Here it’s the most important aspect and you have to think more – the law doesn’t include everything, and court rulings always change some aspects.”

A second hearing: While she was studying in Brussels, Jessica used to come to Israel to volunteer on kibbutz during the vacations. “I went to kibbutz to chill out. It’s like Club Med – you don’t really know what’s going on the outside world,” Jessica comments. “Eventually I decided to move to Jerusalem, because I wanted to have a taste of real Israeli life.” The festivals were the time when she felt this most strongly: “It’s a really warm feeling. I never celebrated the festivals in Belgium, but here everyone does it, so you want to join in and you never feel alone. Even if you don’t have any family to celebrate with, people invite you over.” Jessica was in Israel during Operation Pillar of Defense. She recalls that when her friends from Belgium used to ask her about the security situation, she explained that compared to what they were seeing on television people weren’t that stressed. “The first time the sirens sounded I was nervous,” she admits, “but the second time I was calm just like everyone else. You get used to it.”

Who am I? Yaacov Gorovoy

Age: 25

Year: 2

The facts: Yaacov is originally from Ramle and now lives in the French Hill neighborhood of Jerusalem. Whatever he does, he likes to do it well. Although he had dreamed of studying law since he was a young boy, he came to the studies through a roundabout and competitive course.

I got it from the television serials – I wanted to be like the characters who strike a real pose, make a speech, and everyone applauds and wipes away a tear. Later I found out that I’m good at that, too, or at least better than I was in the other things I tried out. I find the studies at the Faculty much more interesting than I expected.”

A second hearing: Computer science wasn’t Yaacov’s first port of call. Before that he was an outstanding sportsman in two fields – judo and soccer. “Actually, my own career in judo was overshadowed by that of my brother, who was more successful than I was. I started when I was six because it seemed a really cool sport – people throwing each other over. I started to train regularly, and by the age of 12 I had won the Israeli championship for my age group, and then I won the Israeli champion of champions cup. But when I reached the age of 14 I realized that my brother was better than me, and he was invited to join the Israeli national squad. I decided to quit and find my own niche where I could be the best. That’s why I started to play soccer. I played as a goalkeeper and was accepted by the Bnai Yehuda youth team. I played twice in the winter tournament which was held in Israel at the time. I played against Poland and Romania and I only let in one goal.” Yaacov might well have gone on to a fine career in soccer if it hadn’t been for an injury to his collarbone when he was 17 that put him out of action. “The rehabilitation process was very slow. The accident happened at a crucial stage when you have to apply for ‘outstanding sportsman’ status from the army and I did not make it. Today I’m not really up to form as a soccer player, although I still play in the neighborhood league in Jerusalem.”

Who am I? David Shapira

Age: 47

Year: 2

The facts: David is hardly the typical student. While most students come to the Faculty after the army, David is nearly 50 and his law degree is merely the latest stage in a long academic career. Most of David’s relatives died in the Holocaust, and at the age of 18 he immigrated to Israel from France. He served in the army and studied in yeshiva. At the age of 32 he began to study in the university, and by 40 he completed his doctorate degree. After undertaking postgraduate research in the field of anti-Semitism and working in France as an emissary for two years, he came back to Israel to realize an old dream: studying law at the Hebrew University.

Why law? “When you write a study on a historical subject, you need a thorough understanding of the social, economic, psychological, and legal background of the surrounding society or the subject of your research. We have come to see that law plays a dominant role in the historical narrative of peoples. For example, a legal error and failure such as the Dreyfus affair accelerated the process that led Herzl to found the Zionist movement.” David is probably the oldest student in his year class, and this sometimes presents a challenge. “My classmates are not just young people, but very gifted young people,” he explains. “They are quicker than average. That’s a real challenge, but it’s also very refreshing to make friends with them. I am absolutely convinced that this friendship will continue even after we complete our studies.”

A second hearing: David was forced to miss several weeks of the second semester for an unusual reason: he stood as a candidate in the French parliamentary elections. “A year ago, French citizens living outside France were allowed for the first time to stand for parliament. The French citizens living in Israel belong to District 8, together with Italy, Turkey, Greece and Cyprus. At first I was the only Israeli candidate and I thought I had some chance of winning. Unfortunately, as time went on, a large number of independents joined the race, splitting the vote. We were unable to unite behind a single candidate, although I declared several times during the campaign that I was willing to withdraw if they decided to support another Israeli candidate. Although I wasn’t elected, I am grateful for this unique opportunity. We established an elections headquarters, website and Facebook page, and we put up posters and toured the grassroots.” What about his studies: “I explained my plans to the lecturers and asked them to take these into account when setting deadlines for papers. They agreed. Now I’m filling in the gaps in my studies, but it isn’t too bad. It’s hard to stop someone who’s determined and motivated to achieve something.”

Supreme Court President (Ret.) Dorit Beinisch Joins the Faculty of Law

Leading figures from all sections of the Israeli legal community attended a conference honoring Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch on the occasion of her retirement * The numerous speakers at the conference represented the full legal spectrum in Israel, including senior academics, former and present judges, and veteran and young attorneys * We offer some impressions of the conference, as well as a special interview with President Beinisch as she joins the Faculty of Law at the Hebrew University   

“Dorit Beinisch is not only a trailblazer: as the first woman jurist to fill the key positions in our legal system, she is also a role model.” Professor Yuval Shany, dean of the Faculty of Law, chose these words to open his comments on the second day of the conference. The conference was hosted jointly by the Faculties of Law of the Hebrew University and Bar Ilan University. Professor Shany was followed by a series of distinguished speakers – former and present Supreme Court justices and other judges, deans of the various faculties and schools of law around Israel, academics, attorneys and prosecutors. The conference was divided into two parts. The first day focused on an analysis of Justice and President Beinisch, while the second was devoted to her public involvement – from her time as a prosecutor and director of the HCJ Petitions Department through the key issues she handled as state attorney and on to her managerial function as president of the Supreme Court. Public service, sensitivity to social concerns, and a practical approach formed a leitmotiv in the lectures on the second day.

Public Service, Social Sensitivity and Quiet Revolutions

The conference day at the Hebrew University included three sessions, all of which were devoted to practical and theoretical studies by academics and legal practitioners in various fields relating to public service and the attorney in the civil service. Space prevents us from providing a summary of all the remarks, so we shall mention just a selected few.

In the first session, Professor Yoav Dotan (previous Dean of the Faculty of Law), Attorney Shai Nitzan and Professor Ariel Bendor discussed the character of the public service attorney. Attorney Shai Nitzan, the deputy attorney general, began his career as the assistant to then State Attorney Dorit Beinisch, and noted the dilemmas that face attorneys in the public service in their contacts with the authorities they represent. “On the internal level,” Attorney Nitzan explained, “their function is first and foremost not to object or raise difficulties, but to provide proper advice for the staff of the authorities.

Supreme Court President (Ret.) Dorit Beinisch

The activity should be examined within the framework of the law, and if necessary the attorney should try to help and to be creative. Even if a particular issue has not been addressed in court, the fact that there is currently no precedent does not mean that there should not be a precedent. Creativity is a tool that defines the capability of the public sector attorney. But when an attorney or jurist forms the conclusion that a member of the authority seeks to do something that is illegal, he must warn him; and if the act crosses a red line, then it cannot be represented in court.”

The moderator of the first session, district court Judge Nava Ben Or, commented in her conclusion: “We can state that the point of departure is that the public service jurist must have a world view. The lack of a world view creates a dangerous individual and a valueless public service.”

The second session was entitled “A Judge among Her People.” The speakers in this session discussed Justice Beinisch’s known social sensitivity in the courtroom and in her rulings. One of the speakers was Supreme Court Justice (Retired) Eliezer Rivlin, who also recently joined the Faculty of Law of the Hebrew University. In his remarks, Justice Rivlin mentioned several of President Beinisch’s rulings on social issues. “You can find among Beinisch’s work public rulings that implement the protection of human rights, rulings relating to the right to equality, and rulings concerning all sectors of society and fields of life,” Justice Rivlin explained. “For example, although Beinisch refrained from establishing that the right to education is a constitutional right, she raised the status and importance of this right. Beinisch determined that the decision not to provide full protection for schools suffering missiles attack from Gaza violates the right to education. Parents should not bear the responsibility, she established, for choosing between their children’s safety and their education.”

This session was moderated by Supreme Court Justice (Retired) Yitzhak Zamir (another former Dean of the Faculty of Law). In his introductory comments, Justice Zamir discussed the different streams common in the legal field, between a position that seeks to restrict its function and one that argues that the court should play as active a role as the other branches of government. “There can be no doubt which school Dorit Beinisch belongs to, even when she was still an attorney,” Justice Zamir declared. “She led the Supreme Court toward a positive role in advancing society, and particularly in filling in gaps in the actions of the other branches of government. This requires confrontation and discomfort and demands adhesion to firm values – struggles she withstood successfully. Dorit Beinisch deserves thanks and admiration for this stance.”

Supreme Court President Asher Grunis and the Dean, Professor Yuval Shany

In the third session of the conference, the speakers focused mainly on President Beinisch’s defense of the judicial branch during periods of considerable tension with the other branches of government. One of the speakers was Judge Moshe Gal, who served as the director of the court during Justice Beinisch’s presidency. Judge Gal mentioned the quiet revolution that was introduced in the management of the judicial system during Beinisch’s period of office.

“The system was unmanageable and exceptional leadership was needed in order to introduce the changes that were made during President Beinisch’s period,” Judge Gal explained. “Even within the judiciary it is sometimes difficult to understand who heads the system – there is no hierarchical structure. How can we manage such a system? In the face of these difficulties, we seek to introduce a managerial doctrine. After discussions with organizational consultants, we reached the conclusion that something had to be done. The proper management of the judiciary demands the conclusion that the presidents of the various courts will be responsible for managing their courts, and will be accountable to the president of the Supreme Court. We created a model of responsibility: The president of the Supreme Court is responsible for the presidents, but also bears responsibility toward the justice minister in the administrative sphere.

These moves demanded a change in the organizational culture during a period of instability in the court’s relations with the Knesset and the government. Without President Beinisch’s leadership, we could not have embarked on this revolutionary course of action and inculcated it throughout the judicial system.”

The concluding speakers at the conference were Professor Yuval Shany; Judge Einav Golomb, as the representative of President Beinisch’s interns and assistants over her long career; and Supreme Court President Justice Asher Grunis. Last of all, President Beinisch herself went up to the podium. “I don’t think I’m a "warrior," but I do think that jurists recognize the law is not detached from life, and this is how it should be regarded. The ability to combine theory and practice is critical and essential for anyone who wants to be involved in law.”

 
**

Dean of Faculty, Professor Yuval Shany

From Judge to Lecturer

Just a few days after the conference, President Beinisch agreed to let us interview her as she joins our Faculty. President Beinisch is due to teach a joint course next year with Professor Barak Medina on the subject of national security and human rights.

In his opening comments at the conference, Faculty Dean Professor Shany commented on the new addition to the Faculty: “We are delighted that following her retirement President Beinisch has agreed to continue to make a contribution as a lecturer in law, and has chosen to return to the Hebrew University. By so doing, she is closing a circle – making a contribution to academia, in the faculty where she began her career, and addressing the subject of human rights, to which she has been committed in all her public positions.”

In the interview, however, President Beinisch was reluctant to see her decision as a “transition to academia.” She explained: “That’s a bit of an exaggeration. This isn’t a stage in my life when I’ve decided to launch an academic career. I strongly believe that academic analysis in law also has practical purpose and application. This apparent ‘transition’ is simply part of the overall mission.”

So you don’t see these as two separate worlds?
“I don’t see academia as an opposing pole to the court, but as an integral part of the desire to ‘make law.’ Academic research and judicial work are both directly involved in implementing our values as a society so that we can protect it. Academia should not be disconnected from judicial work, and judicial work – and I refer here not only to judges, but also to attorneys in the private and public sectors – is not disconnected from the academic contribution.”

Does that mean that as someone who brings that practical experience you can make a particular contribution to academic teaching?

“On the basis of my personal experience, I think that when people begin to study law they know very little about legal work. People are attracted to the profession for all kinds of reasons, both ideological and practical, but they are often unaware of the daily and long-term ramifications of legal work. Accordingly, I think that a good legal education, one that will enable the students to choose the right way for themselves in our complex and diverse profession, requires a synthesis of experience and legal knowledge, of theory and practice. 

Supreme Court Justice (Ret.) Yitzhak Zamir

I certainly believe that the period of studies offers students a golden opportunity to use the legal knowledge they acquire – and this contribution naturally helps them and moves them forward, too. I don’t think this is a matter of lip service at all.”

When was the idea for the course born?

“You could say that this course was born following a conversation between the Dean, Professor Yuval Shany, and myself. I told him about a similar course I taught for a semester in the Faculty of Law at New York University, and he rightly asked why we won't have something similar here.”

What is your goal in the course?

“My goal is to encourage substantive discussion relating to the subject of national security and human rights. This is why we chose not to end the course with an examination, but to base it on project work and oral discussion focusing on court rulings here in Israel and elsewhere.”

Is such discussion also an important tool in later stages?

“Dialogue between the court and the parties who come before it – both the State Attorney’s Office and the petitioners – and the dialogue the court can encourage between the parties form an important component of judicial work. One of the most important steps we can take in this direction, I believe, is to encourage the State Attorney’s Office to adopt a more flexible attitude. I think this is one of the reasons why so many petitions submitted to the High Court of Justice are rejected or end without the need for a ruling. When the appellant raises a substantive and just argument, the State Attorney’s Office should solve the case even before it reaches the point of a court hearing. If the case does come before the court, then dialogue between the court and both sides can produce an awareness that the petitioner’s argument is well-grounded and should be examined – even by the representative of the State Attorney’s Office. In this case, the public attorney is not a litigant before the court, but rather – together with the court – represents the public interest.”

Do you expect the students who take the course to choose a career as judges?
“As I mentioned, when most students begin their legal education they don’t necessarily know which avenue is best for them. Indeed, many of them have still not made this decision by the time they complete their internship, and have to examine several different directions before they choose their career. So I want to be careful about this. I certainly don’t think that the purpose of the course is to push students toward a career as judges or anything like that, but I will be very happy if it encourages them to have a sense of public mission and clarifies the importance of this side of the legal profession. For me, of course, this implies working for the State, but attorneys in the third sector or private attorneys who find ways to advance the public interest are also realizing the same mission. 

Attorney Shai Nitzan

I believe that law can and must make a contribution to society; after all, this is a profession that belongs to the social sciences. It draws from society and maintains a constant process of feedback with it: law is influenced by and influences society.”

What is your impression of the young generation in the legal profession?
“Over the years I have always worked with young people. I like to do so because it provides an opportunity to convey my social message and to encourage recognition of reality. We always build positive dialogue. There is a truly outstanding young generation of inquisitive individuals with amazing intellectual capabilities. Sometimes it seems to me that today’s generation is more mature when it begins law studies than our own generation. This reflects the development of legal education and education in general and is one of the hallmarks of our times. Rather than the traditional saying “I have learned from all my teachers,” it often feels that we cooperate: we senior jurists give our knowledge and experience to the new arrivals, and they give us fresh ways of looking at things. This, too, is another form of dialogue.”

Supreme Court President (Ret.) Dorit Beinisch Joins the Faculty of Law

Leading figures from all sections of the Israeli legal community attended a conference honoring Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch on the occasion of her retirement * The numerous speakers at the conference represented the full legal spectrum in Israel, including senior academics, former and present judges, and veteran and young attorneys * We offer some impressions of the conference, as well as a special interview with President Beinisch as she joins the Faculty of Law at the Hebrew University   

“Dorit Beinisch is not only a trailblazer: as the first woman jurist to fill the key positions in our legal system, she is also a role model.” Professor Yuval Shany, dean of the Faculty of Law, chose these words to open his comments on the second day of the conference. The conference was hosted jointly by the Faculties of Law of the Hebrew University and Bar Ilan University. Professor Shany was followed by a series of distinguished speakers – former and present Supreme Court justices and other judges, deans of the various faculties and schools of law around Israel, academics, attorneys and prosecutors. The conference was divided into two parts. The first day focused on an analysis of Justice and President Beinisch, while the second was devoted to her public involvement – from her time as a prosecutor and director of the HCJ Petitions Department through the key issues she handled as state attorney and on to her managerial function as president of the Supreme Court. Public service, sensitivity to social concerns, and a practical approach formed a leitmotiv in the lectures on the second day.

Public Service, Social Sensitivity and Quiet Revolutions

The conference day at the Hebrew University included three sessions, all of which were devoted to practical and theoretical studies by academics and legal practitioners in various fields relating to public service and the attorney in the civil service. Space prevents us from providing a summary of all the remarks, so we shall mention just a selected few.

In the first session, Professor Yoav Dotan (previous Dean of the Faculty of Law), Attorney Shai Nitzan and Professor Ariel Bendor discussed the character of the public service attorney. Attorney Shai Nitzan, the deputy attorney general, began his career as the assistant to then State Attorney Dorit Beinisch, and noted the dilemmas that face attorneys in the public service in their contacts with the authorities they represent. “On the internal level,” Attorney Nitzan explained, “their function is first and foremost not to object or raise difficulties, but to provide proper advice for the staff of the authorities.

Supreme Court President (Ret.) Dorit Beinisch

The activity should be examined within the framework of the law, and if necessary the attorney should try to help and to be creative. Even if a particular issue has not been addressed in court, the fact that there is currently no precedent does not mean that there should not be a precedent. Creativity is a tool that defines the capability of the public sector attorney. But when an attorney or jurist forms the conclusion that a member of the authority seeks to do something that is illegal, he must warn him; and if the act crosses a red line, then it cannot be represented in court.”

The moderator of the first session, district court Judge Nava Ben Or, commented in her conclusion: “We can state that the point of departure is that the public service jurist must have a world view. The lack of a world view creates a dangerous individual and a valueless public service.”

The second session was entitled “A Judge among Her People.” The speakers in this session discussed Justice Beinisch’s known social sensitivity in the courtroom and in her rulings. One of the speakers was Supreme Court Justice (Retired) Eliezer Rivlin, who also recently joined the Faculty of Law of the Hebrew University. In his remarks, Justice Rivlin mentioned several of President Beinisch’s rulings on social issues. “You can find among Beinisch’s work public rulings that implement the protection of human rights, rulings relating to the right to equality, and rulings concerning all sectors of society and fields of life,” Justice Rivlin explained. “For example, although Beinisch refrained from establishing that the right to education is a constitutional right, she raised the status and importance of this right. Beinisch determined that the decision not to provide full protection for schools suffering missiles attack from Gaza violates the right to education. Parents should not bear the responsibility, she established, for choosing between their children’s safety and their education.”

This session was moderated by Supreme Court Justice (Retired) Yitzhak Zamir (another former Dean of the Faculty of Law). In his introductory comments, Justice Zamir discussed the different streams common in the legal field, between a position that seeks to restrict its function and one that argues that the court should play as active a role as the other branches of government. “There can be no doubt which school Dorit Beinisch belongs to, even when she was still an attorney,” Justice Zamir declared. “She led the Supreme Court toward a positive role in advancing society, and particularly in filling in gaps in the actions of the other branches of government. This requires confrontation and discomfort and demands adhesion to firm values – struggles she withstood successfully. Dorit Beinisch deserves thanks and admiration for this stance.”

Supreme Court President Asher Grunis and the Dean, Professor Yuval Shany

In the third session of the conference, the speakers focused mainly on President Beinisch’s defense of the judicial branch during periods of considerable tension with the other branches of government. One of the speakers was Judge Moshe Gal, who served as the director of the court during Justice Beinisch’s presidency. Judge Gal mentioned the quiet revolution that was introduced in the management of the judicial system during Beinisch’s period of office.

“The system was unmanageable and exceptional leadership was needed in order to introduce the changes that were made during President Beinisch’s period,” Judge Gal explained. “Even within the judiciary it is sometimes difficult to understand who heads the system – there is no hierarchical structure. How can we manage such a system? In the face of these difficulties, we seek to introduce a managerial doctrine. After discussions with organizational consultants, we reached the conclusion that something had to be done. The proper management of the judiciary demands the conclusion that the presidents of the various courts will be responsible for managing their courts, and will be accountable to the president of the Supreme Court. We created a model of responsibility: The president of the Supreme Court is responsible for the presidents, but also bears responsibility toward the justice minister in the administrative sphere.

These moves demanded a change in the organizational culture during a period of instability in the court’s relations with the Knesset and the government. Without President Beinisch’s leadership, we could not have embarked on this revolutionary course of action and inculcated it throughout the judicial system.”

The concluding speakers at the conference were Professor Yuval Shany; Judge Einav Golomb, as the representative of President Beinisch’s interns and assistants over her long career; and Supreme Court President Justice Asher Grunis. Last of all, President Beinisch herself went up to the podium. “I don’t think I’m a "warrior," but I do think that jurists recognize the law is not detached from life, and this is how it should be regarded. The ability to combine theory and practice is critical and essential for anyone who wants to be involved in law.”

 
**

Dean of Faculty, Professor Yuval Shany

From Judge to Lecturer

Just a few days after the conference, President Beinisch agreed to let us interview her as she joins our Faculty. President Beinisch is due to teach a joint course next year with Professor Barak Medina on the subject of national security and human rights.

In his opening comments at the conference, Faculty Dean Professor Shany commented on the new addition to the Faculty: “We are delighted that following her retirement President Beinisch has agreed to continue to make a contribution as a lecturer in law, and has chosen to return to the Hebrew University. By so doing, she is closing a circle – making a contribution to academia, in the faculty where she began her career, and addressing the subject of human rights, to which she has been committed in all her public positions.”

In the interview, however, President Beinisch was reluctant to see her decision as a “transition to academia.” She explained: “That’s a bit of an exaggeration. This isn’t a stage in my life when I’ve decided to launch an academic career. I strongly believe that academic analysis in law also has practical purpose and application. This apparent ‘transition’ is simply part of the overall mission.”

So you don’t see these as two separate worlds?
“I don’t see academia as an opposing pole to the court, but as an integral part of the desire to ‘make law.’ Academic research and judicial work are both directly involved in implementing our values as a society so that we can protect it. Academia should not be disconnected from judicial work, and judicial work – and I refer here not only to judges, but also to attorneys in the private and public sectors – is not disconnected from the academic contribution.”

Does that mean that as someone who brings that practical experience you can make a particular contribution to academic teaching?

“On the basis of my personal experience, I think that when people begin to study law they know very little about legal work. People are attracted to the profession for all kinds of reasons, both ideological and practical, but they are often unaware of the daily and long-term ramifications of legal work. Accordingly, I think that a good legal education, one that will enable the students to choose the right way for themselves in our complex and diverse profession, requires a synthesis of experience and legal knowledge, of theory and practice. 

Supreme Court Justice (Ret.) Yitzhak Zamir

I certainly believe that the period of studies offers students a golden opportunity to use the legal knowledge they acquire – and this contribution naturally helps them and moves them forward, too. I don’t think this is a matter of lip service at all.”

When was the idea for the course born?

“You could say that this course was born following a conversation between the Dean, Professor Yuval Shany, and myself. I told him about a similar course I taught for a semester in the Faculty of Law at New York University, and he rightly asked why we won't have something similar here.”

What is your goal in the course?

“My goal is to encourage substantive discussion relating to the subject of national security and human rights. This is why we chose not to end the course with an examination, but to base it on project work and oral discussion focusing on court rulings here in Israel and elsewhere.”

Is such discussion also an important tool in later stages?

“Dialogue between the court and the parties who come before it – both the State Attorney’s Office and the petitioners – and the dialogue the court can encourage between the parties form an important component of judicial work. One of the most important steps we can take in this direction, I believe, is to encourage the State Attorney’s Office to adopt a more flexible attitude. I think this is one of the reasons why so many petitions submitted to the High Court of Justice are rejected or end without the need for a ruling. When the appellant raises a substantive and just argument, the State Attorney’s Office should solve the case even before it reaches the point of a court hearing. If the case does come before the court, then dialogue between the court and both sides can produce an awareness that the petitioner’s argument is well-grounded and should be examined – even by the representative of the State Attorney’s Office. In this case, the public attorney is not a litigant before the court, but rather – together with the court – represents the public interest.”

Do you expect the students who take the course to choose a career as judges?
“As I mentioned, when most students begin their legal education they don’t necessarily know which avenue is best for them. Indeed, many of them have still not made this decision by the time they complete their internship, and have to examine several different directions before they choose their career. So I want to be careful about this. I certainly don’t think that the purpose of the course is to push students toward a career as judges or anything like that, but I will be very happy if it encourages them to have a sense of public mission and clarifies the importance of this side of the legal profession. For me, of course, this implies working for the State, but attorneys in the third sector or private attorneys who find ways to advance the public interest are also realizing the same mission. 

Attorney Shai Nitzan

I believe that law can and must make a contribution to society; after all, this is a profession that belongs to the social sciences. It draws from society and maintains a constant process of feedback with it: law is influenced by and influences society.”

What is your impression of the young generation in the legal profession?
“Over the years I have always worked with young people. I like to do so because it provides an opportunity to convey my social message and to encourage recognition of reality. We always build positive dialogue. There is a truly outstanding young generation of inquisitive individuals with amazing intellectual capabilities. Sometimes it seems to me that today’s generation is more mature when it begins law studies than our own generation. This reflects the development of legal education and education in general and is one of the hallmarks of our times. Rather than the traditional saying “I have learned from all my teachers,” it often feels that we cooperate: we senior jurists give our knowledge and experience to the new arrivals, and they give us fresh ways of looking at things. This, too, is another form of dialogue.”

The Sacher Institute for Legislative Research and Comparative Law: The Faculty’s Platform for Academic Publications

The Sacher Institute, which is based at the Faculty of Law of the Hebrew University, is the largest and oldest publisher of academic legal works in Israel * Professor David Glicksberg, the head of the Institute, tells us about some upcoming publications and discusses the challenges facing the Institute

The Faculty of Law at the Hebrew University is recognized as the leading academic institution in Israel in its field. It has earned this status by right, thanks to its outstanding scholars and academics who continue to stand at the vanguard of legal thought. However, scholars can only disseminate their findings if they have access to a suitable platform for publishing their work. The Sacher Institute for Legislative Research and Comparative Law, which serves as the Faculty’s publishing house, was established with the support of the Sacher family to meet this need.

“The Institute was established several decades ago,” explains Professor David Glicksberg, who serves as its head. “It has several functions, but the principal one is to publish academic literature in the legal field. We are the most important publisher in Israel in this field, and virtually the only publisher of high-quality academic texts. Today, our books are published in cooperation with Nevo publishers. A large number of books are published every year, and many other manuscripts are rejected. The Institute is also responsible for publishing two journals: The Hebrew University Law Review (Mishpatim) and the Journal on Legislation (Hukim).”

Do you focus on any particular area?

“No, as a matter of policy we adopt the opposite approach and publish works ranging across the entire legal field, without any exceptions. We also publish interdisciplinary texts and literature in the field of criminology, since the Institute of Criminology is an integral part of the Faculty of Law. To date, we have published many hundreds of books and journals. There is no academic legal publisher in Israel that can compete with the Sacher Institute in terms of quality or quantity.”

Who are the authors of these works?
“The authors are not only lecturers at the Faculty of Law in Jerusalem. Many lectures from all the Israeli universities and colleges also contact us. For example, we are currently working on a book on tort law written by Professor Ariel Porat of Tel Aviv University. This book will join another work in the same field written by Professor Israel Gilad of the Jerusalem Faculty which we published recently.”

Professor David Glicksberg

What process does a manuscript undergo before it emerges as an Institute publication?
“As head of the Institute, I am responsible for the initial screening of manuscripts sent to us by authors. Every manuscript is sent to two or three external readers, who express their opinion as to whether it is worthy of publication by the Institute. If the decision is positive, they may also suggest changes that should be made to the manuscript. We receive these opinions and forward them to the authors. In most cases the authors are grateful for the input and improve the manuscript on the basis of these comments.”

What do you look for in your preliminary screening?
“It’s important to understand that our standards for publication are very high. The authors are aware of this. In addition, we do not usually accept manuscripts with a purely practical focus: we are interested in books that include a strong academic foundation. This is not enough in itself, however. We also want to make sure that the book shows strong academic quality from start to finish. These considerations influence the criteria we use in examining manuscripts. Since the legal community is well aware of our high demands, we do not usually receive poor-quality manuscripts. The Institute’s literary genres include monographs and collections of articles. These may be initiated by the editors themselves or by the Institute. In the collections, too, we are committed to the highest academic standards.”

This sounds like a protracted process. Doesn’t it create all kinds of problems?
“We do our best to make the process as short as possible, and it is usually completed within a few months. Our agreement with Nevo means that the technical production stages are completed very quickly. The books are published at a high standard of finishing in technical and visual terms. Our cooperation with Nevo results in products that can stand their own against the publications of any similar institution. Delays are usually caused when the authors have to respond to comments, make changes, proofread the draft and add indexes and so forth. Sometimes we have a problem finding referees with expertise in the area covered by the book who can offer their opinion on the manuscript. Again, we try to work efficiently without compromising the quality of the opinions. By the way, this is a great opportunity to thank all the referees who perform their task with such devotion.”

**

Professor David Glicksberg, one of the leading experts on taxation in the State of Israel, was appointed head of the Institute in 2012. Previous occupants of this position include some prominent names in the Israeli legal world. The first head of the Institute was Dr. Uri Yadin, and subsequent heads included Yitzhak Zamir, Yitzhak Englard, Gabriela Shalev, Celia Wasserstein-Fassberg, Miri Gur-Aryeh, Shimon Shetreet, Michael Karayanni, and many others. The Institute’s board includes Dr. Benny Porat and Professor Shimon Shetreet, in addition to Professor Glicksberg.

Does the Institute focus exclusively on publishing books?
“No. We are the publishers of the Hebrew University Law Review and the Journal on Legislation. We also organize seminars and conferences, and we publish the Jerusalem Review of Legal Studies in cooperation with Oxford University Press. We also provide an annual post-doctorate scholarship to help encourage the young generation of scholars.”

What challenges are you facing today?
“One of the main problems we are examining is the impact of globalization on our publications. Today, the Israeli legal community shows a strong preference to publish its works in languages other than Hebrew and on foreign platforms. This also affects the willingness of the academic community to contribute articles to books other than monographs, such as collections of articles. The editors and the Institute apply intensive pressure to convince members of the community to write books in Hebrew intended for the domestic market.”

Isn’t globalization also affecting you?
“As I mentioned, globalization has had a strong impact in terms of the willingness of scholars to write in Hebrew. I am currently working on a cooperative arrangement with a very large European publisher in order to enable the publication of works in English. One of the ways journals are coping with the process of globalization is to produce single-theme issues based on a seminar. For example, the Hebrew University Law Review held a seminar last June featuring empirical and behavioristic studies.”

What are you working on just now?
“We are very busy publishing a wide variety of books. I already mentioned the book by Professor Ariel Porat of Tel Aviv University. We are also about to publish a particularly comprehensive study in the field of private international law written by Professor Celia Fassberg. The list is very long. We are working on several collections of articles. The Institute also recently initiated a memorial publication honoring the late Justice Elon, deputy president of the Supreme Court, who passed away a few months ago.”