The Commissioner for Complaints against Judges, retired Justice Asher Grunis, recently issued a principled decision regarding the conduct of Judge Michal Agmon-Gonen on social networks and online forums. The complaints focused on the judge’s membership in a WhatsApp forum of the Israel Women’s Network, activity that included posting messages and recommending an attorney who appears before her in judicial proceedings. The examination of the complaint included a review of messages posted in the group, which described assistance in referring a legal position and the publication of an advertisement that sparked a gender-based discussion.
In contrast, Judge Agmon-Gonen rejected the allegations on their merits. In her response, she noted that it was a professional and closed forum intended for female jurists to exchange knowledge and promote gender equality. Regarding the recommendation of the attorney, the judge clarified that it was a technical error of sending a private message to a large group, and that she has no business or personal relationship with the attorney in question. She also explained that she did not intend to incite action following the posted advertisement, but rather to spark an internal discussion on gender stereotypes.
Commissioner Grunis’s decision sets markers regarding the boundaries for judges in the digital space. First, it was determined that a forum consisting of hundreds of participants cannot be considered a private space that grants immunity from criticism regarding statements. The Commissioner noted that given the Israel Women’s Network's involvement in initiating legal proceedings and controversial public issues, active membership of a sitting judge in such an organization is inconsistent with the duties of restraint and moderation imposed on judges under the ethical rules.
Additionally, the Commissioner found that a public recommendation by a judge for an attorney appearing before her, particularly the use of such a title, could lead to damage to the appearance of equality among litigants and judicial neutrality. The Commissioner clarified that sending a message by mistake does not negate the ethical flaw created. Alongside the critical findings, the Commissioner emphasized that his steps do not express an opinion on the activities of the Israel Women’s Network itself.
Despite finding the complaints justified, the Commissioner determined that there is no place for disciplinary action against the judge. Instead, the Commissioner recommended the formulation of clear guidelines for all judges regarding participation in online forums and providing recommendations for attorneys, with the goal of preserving public trust in the judicial system and equality among litigants.