This morning (Thursday), the Supreme Court unanimously decided to overturn the decision of former Education Minister Galant to reject the recommendation of the Israel Prize Committee to award Prof. Goldreich the prize for the year 2001 in the field of mathematics and computer science research. The court ordered that the decision regarding the awarding of the Israel Prize be returned to the Minister of Education, so that it could reconsider whether to approve this recommendation.
In February 2021, the Judges Committee for the Israel Prize decided to award the Israel Prize to Prof. Goldreich, for in-depth and groundbreaking contributions in his fields of research. The committee's decision was not ultimately approved by the education minister, who believed that publications and petitions signed by Goldreich in the past show his support for the boycott movement on Israel (BDS). The Attorney General objected to the position of the Minister of Education and believed that Prof. Goldreich's case was not one of the exceptional cases that warranted intervention in the committee's decision, and therefore its decision should be approved and the award given to him.
Judge Yitzhak Amit, who wrote the main verdict, accepted Mandelblit's position and ruled that there was no reason to intervene in the committee's decision to award Prof. Goldreich the prize.
Judge Amit reiterated the entrenched jurisprudence on the subject of the Israel Prize, which clarified that the committee's considerations in recommending the award are purely professional and excellent, while personal opinions and statements of nominees on issues not related to the professional field have no place in the committee's considerations.
Judge Noam Solberg noted that the main consideration in selecting a winner of the Israel Prize is the degree of his excellence and professional contribution, while his endearing personality or pleasant demeanor do not stand the test.
The trend is to prevent politicization of the award, with the understanding that gliding from the professional to the personal realm, which is inherently dimmer, can be as material in the hands of the creator.
But never resilience.
Judge Solberg noted a number of "external" considerations that could be considered in exceptional cases.
Only about three weeks ago, Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit emphasized in his position to the High Court that the decision of the previous Minister of Education, Yoav Galant, is unreasonable and not legally valid.
The decision on the matter is brought before the court after the members of the committee of inquiry themselves filed a petition against the decision to deny Prof. Goldreich the prize.
Goldreich of the Weizmann Institute was selected by the Prize Committee for his work in the field of mathematics and computer science research, and for his work on the subject of computational complexity.
Opposition to the appointment stemmed, among other things, from his signing of a petition calling on the EU to end collaborations of institutions or programs related to the EU with Ariel University in 2011.
In the position expressed by the ombudsman before the High Court, he stated in a precedent-setting position on his behalf that a call for a boycott of the State of Israel or its institutions can be used as a relevant and legitimate consideration in making a decision regarding the award of the Israel Prize.
Prof. Goldreich of the Weizmann Institute was selected by the Prize Committee for his work in the field of mathematical and computer science research for his work on computational complexity, but Education Minister Yoav Galant rejected the committee's recommendation because Goldreich signed a petition calling on the EU to stop cooperating with institutions or programs. To the European Union with Ariel University. Exceptionally, it was the committee that filed the petition in court.
