What judges and dockworkers have in common

Both are guilds that extort outrageous perks at our expense. But only one claims to be above criticism.

March 4, 2013 15:32
Netanyahu and Attorney-General Weinstein [file]

Netanyahu and Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein 370. (photo credit: REUTERS)

In recent years, considerable outrage has been directed at the country’s most powerful unions, and justifiably so: Workers at the ports, railroads, electric company and other government monopolies extort outrageous salaries and benefits from the public while providing mediocre service. But one government guild has inexplicably been given a pass even though its behavior is actually far less excusable – because unlike other unions, which make no pretense of any loftier aim than serving their own members, this guild not only sees itself as a moral exemplar, but insists that any criticism of its members is unacceptable. I am talking, of course, about the judges.

Last week, we discovered that Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein refused for three years to let police question a judge suspected of child abuse, since the harm from doing so might “outweigh the benefit.” Needless to say, anyone else suspected of child abuse would be interrogated forthwith, since as the courts themselves have repeatedly ruled, “the welfare of the child” takes precedence over other considerations.


Related Content