Prof. Gavison Public Activity
Constitutional Provision: Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State
On the 12th of August 2013 , the Minister of Justice asked Professor Ruth Gavison to formulate a proposal of a constitutional provision dealing with the character of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state in a manner that balances and integrates these values, both the Jewish and the democratic.
It appears that there is a wide consensus regarding the character of the state as Jewish and democratic, and this fact has even been given an anchoring in the 1992 basic laws, the proclaimed part of Israel’s constitution. However, there are substantial disagreements about the interpretation of the components of the definition of the state identity and the relations between them. These disagreements are reflected, among other things, in recent draft bills seeking to give further constitutional anchoring to components of the state's identity.
The investigation will look into both substantive and institutional aspects of a constitutional anchoring of the identity of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. In addition, an attempt will be made to identify the attitudes within different segments in the Israeli society to these complex terms and the relations between them.
The investigation will build on previous similar efforts of civil society and the Knesset. It will be based on examining the relevant literature, and on consultations with experts and organizations in Israel and abroad. This site will document the progress of the process and hold relevant materials and information.
Within a few months, a proposal with explanatory notes concerning the recommended approach to the constitutional anchoring of the state identity will be submitted to the minister, so it may aid public debate and the work of the Knesset.
Read more about the Constitutional provision.
Read the recommendations submitted by Prof. Gavison to the Minister of Justice.
Metzilah Center of Zionist, Jewish, Liberal and Humanist Thought
Prof. Gavison on the Founding of Metzilah:
I take pleasure in presenting Metzilah – the Center for Zionist, Jewish, Liberal and Humanistic Thought.
Allow me to confess that I really did not wish to establish an organization. I did so because it suddenly became clear to me that many of the ideals that were so important to me that I had thought of them as obvious and clear-cut to all, were not in fact so and there is a danger that they might become vulnerable to being overturned. It turns out that there are many people who consider these ideals unjustified. And if we do not take a stand, there is a risk that we might lose out. I also came to the realization that there are many like-minded people in Israel, people who see things in the same light as I do and are also troubled by the same issues – together we can make a difference.
Over the years, in all my activities, I have always laid emphasis on the universal principles of human rights, humanism and liberalism. I wanted my country to respect these essential values even though it was undergoing an existential struggle and trying to establish its identity. I was born into an environment that assumed that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, whose native language is Hebrew, and whose public culture is Jewish. From my point of view, this is the natural order of things. It only became clear to me what an amazing achievement this was when I learned about the history of the Jewish people and about the Holocaust; about the revival of the Hebrew language and about Zionism; about illegal immigration to the pre-state country and about the Haganah (the paramilitary organization of Jews in Palestine during the period of the British Mandate; the Haganah was the precursor of the Israel Defense Forces). I thought then that the ability and the right of Jews to have a country must be balanced against the rights of the Arabs to have independence and dignity. I thought that a way should be found to include and accept all approaches to Judaism – and that the religious approach, or for that matter, the anti-religious approach should not have a monopoly on the unique richness of our culture. I knew that it was important to put in place a system which could be a fount of progress, morals and Jewish values.
But it became apparent that there are those who deny the right of Jews to have independence, self-determination and security. Some of them are even involved in an attempt to abolish this right within the State of Israel. There are some who wish to exert religious coercion in Israel. Others are willing to disregard the value of human rights in order to maintain the unique quality of the state. There are yet others willing to negate the special Jewish nature of the State – historic, national, religious and cultural – and to let it become a state like all others. The combination of all these is liable to result in a real erosion of Israel’s ability to survive as a Jewish state, and of the ability of Jews in Israel to live an independent lifestyle.
I am convinced that the time to act is now - so as to avert the danger inherent in these scenarios. It is the right thing to do. There is much that needs to be done, and we must get together to take action. All of this is what Metzilah aims to do and what I myself want to get done in Metzilah. I am grateful to all those who support Metzilah – and will be pleased to welcome you amongst the Metzilah supporters in thought and in deed.
Read more on the Metzilah websie.
The Gavison - Medan Social Covenant on Religion and State Issues
About the Covenant:
Before the establishment of Israel and in the first years after independence, the "status quo" arrangement served as a consensual framework for relations between observant and non-observant Jews in the country. In recent years, however, complex processes in Israeli society have caused the "status quo" to lose much of its force. The distressing result is that the common frameworks have been undermined, the internal fissures have grown wider, and the conventional mechanisms for resolving disagreements have been significantly weakened.
The Gavison-Medan Covenant is the most recent of a series of similar documents drawn up over the past decade that seek to mend these rifts. Its authors, Prof. Ruth Gavison and Rabbi Yaacov Medan, spent three years writing the Covenant, producing a comprehensive 300-page document that presents proposals, detailed explanations, and the authors' personal credos.
The Covenant deals with many issues, including the Law of Return, citizenship, and conversion, marriage and divorce, the Sabbath, kashrut, burial, and the religious councils.
Read the main points and principle of the Covenant.
Read more on the Gavison-Medan Covenant website.
Prof. Gavison Wins Israel Prize for Legal Research
In her work, Gavison delved deeply into the central issues of constitutional law in Israel, and 'confronted with courage and depth the shaping of Israel's identity as a Jewish and democratic state'. Article from 'Haaretz':
Prof. Ruth Gavison is this year's Israel Prize laureate for legal research. The prize jury, headed by Prof. Ruth Lapidoth, wrote in its decision that in her work, Gavison delved deeply into the central issues of constitutional law in Israel, and "confronted with courage and depth the shaping of Israel's identity as a Jewish and democratic state."
The jury also noted that Gavison's work "paves the ways for coexistence between secular and religious Jews, as well as between Jews and non Jews in Israel. Prof. Gavison has engaged in her research in defending human rights, and especially the rights to privacy, freedom of expression and equality, and has combined her ideas and commitment with practical work on the ground."
Born in 1945, Gavison completed her doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford in 1975, concentrating on issues related to privacy. She taught at the Hebrew University's law school from 1974 to 2010, and held the Haim Cohen Chair of Human Rights.
Gavison co-founded the Association for Civil Rights Israel and served as a senior fellow at the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem, where she researched issues in democracy and the relationship between law and politics. She also served as a senior fellow at the Israeli Democracy Institute, from 1995 to 2003.
Gavison was also a member of several public bodies, most memorably the Winograd Committee, which examined the lessons of the Second Lebanon War. She was a candidate in 2005 to become a Supreme Court justice, but then-Supreme Court President Aharon Barak spurred controversy when he remarked that he thought her "agenda" did not fit well with the court's.
Gavison was a well-known opponent of Barak's activist line and in particular the "constitutional revolution" he launched, when ruling that the court has the authority to revoke Knesset legislation.
Prof. Gavison Awarded EMET Prize in Law for 2003
The prize was awarded to Prof. Gavison for being one of Israel’s pre-eminent thinkers in the field of public law in Israel and in legal philosophy, for her academic and public activities in promoting democracy, championing human rights and for her great contribution to the prestige of the Rule of Law in Israel.
The Prize is awarded every year to winners in 5 fields: exact sciences, life sciences, social sciences, humanities and Judaism, and culture and art. Each field has determined sub-fields, which change every year according to a fixed cycle. The winners are awarded the prizes for academic achievements, which constitute a unique contribution to society.
The winners are chosen by the EMET Prize Award Committee headed by Supreme Court Justice (Ret.) Mr. Gabriel Bach, including: Mr. Arie Dubson (Director General of the Foundation), Atty. Shlomit Barnea-Farago (Legal Adviser to the Prime Minister’s Office), Atty. Jaime Aron (Legal Adviser to the Foundation), Mrs. Shulamit Shamir, Mr. Victor Shem Tov, Prof. Chaim Cedar (The Hebrew University) and Prof. Michael Sela (The Weizman Institute).
The Prize Committee appoints Judging Committees in each field, comprised of three members each. The members of the Judging Committee include well-known names in science and the academia, and are among the leading figures in their respective fields. Some of them are highly respected award winners (Israel Prize, Wolf Foundation Award, EMET Prize). The Judging Committees examine the nominations presented to the Foundation, and submit their recommendations to the Prize Committee.
The working methods of the Prize Committee, Judging Committees, means of soliciting nominations, requirements, examination of nominations, presenting recommendations and choosing the winners, are all laid out in the set of rules established by the Prime Minister’s Office and the AMN Foundation, and approved by the Prize Committee.
Each year, the prizes are awarded at a ceremony, under the auspices of the Prime Minister’s Office.
Prof. Ruth Gavison was awarded for being one of Israel’s pre-eminent thinkers in the field of public law in Israel and in legal philosophy, for her academic and public activities in promoting democracy, championing human rights and for her great contribution to the prestige of the Rule of Law in Israel.
For many years Prof. Gavison chaired the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and served as the Association’s president for three years. She also chaired the academic committee of the Minerva Center for Human Rights. Today, she is a member of the International Commission of Jurists, Israel Association for Parliamentarism, Mishkanot Sha’ananim’s Academic Committee and the presidium of the Yahad Council and the Committee on the Appointment of the Attorney General. In the past, she served as a senior colleague of the Israel Democracy Institute, as a member of the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Research, and has participated on various public committees, including the Kahan Commission on Privacy, the Klugman Committee on the Privacy of Information in Governmental Databanks, the Shamgar Committee on the Appointment of the Attorney General, the Zadok Committee for Press Laws and the Committee for Secular-Religious Relations in Israel.
Participation in the Winograd Commission
The Winograd Comission, or "The Commission of inquiry into the events of military engagement in Lebanon 2006", was appointed following the Second Lebanese War.
The Committee had its first plenary session on 18 September 2006 and began summoning and hearing testimonies from witnesses on 2 November of that year. On 30 April 2007 the Commission released its preliminary report, harshly criticizing key decision-makers. At the same time, it has been praised as testimony to the fortitude of Israel's democracy and ability to self-criticize, impressing even Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
The final Winograd Commission report was announced in Binyanei HaUma in Jerusalem on 30 January 2008. Prof. Gavison read the english statement after submitting the final report.
Read the statement made by Prof. Gavison with the basic details of the report.