I've said before that Shas, by its very existence and the work it gets involved in, perpetuates racism and discrimination against Sefardim. If there were not any discrimination, Shas would cease to exist, so Shas benefits directly from such discrimination.

An example of that, beyond the daily examples we have, is the current attempt to come to an agreement between the various religious parties to appoint new dayyanim to the beis din hagadol.

As reported earlier, there was a tentative agreement to split the appointments three ways equally between Habayit Hayehudi, UTJ and Shas.

As I pointed out, this agreement means the Haredim get one third ashkenazi haredi dayyanim and one third sefardi haredi dayyanim, and the dati leumim get one third DL dayyanim mixed between sefardi and ashkenazi.

According to a report on Radio Kol Hai, Shas is now objecting to some of the judges nominated by Habayit Hayehudi. Some are idealistic objections - dayyanim they think are too liberal or associated somehow with Tzohar, but others are because they are Sefardi. Shas has objected, and vetoed, all the Sefardi sayyanim nominated by Habayit Hayehudi.

According to the report on Kol Hai, Habayit Hayehudi claims that Shas has done so because it wants to retain control over all sefardim. Shas wants to be known as the only group that looks out for and takes care of sefardim. If Habayit Hayehudi appoints sefardim to the beis din positions, Shas loses that edge and control in the Sefardi community. People might see that Sefardim can get by without Shas.

To be fair to Shas, according to Srugim, Shas has responded by denying the allegations saying it is not true, as they do not even have a representative on the appointments committee.

Shas can appoint judges without having a rep on the committee but they somehow cant object to other appointments?
Even if they do not have their own representative, do they not have the ability to file objections through a proxy, like UTJ perhaps, that does have a representative on the committee?
Is Habayit Hayehudi making such a claim as a red herring - meaning, they dont want to appoint any sefardim but know they have to. So they say they want to but Shas won't let them. Is that possible?

When I first saw the article on Srugim, I did not know if it is worth even asking the question. It sounds like a "he said, he said" argument, and I have no way of knowing who is fudging the truth more than the other. Once Kol Hai writes the report, without even letting Shas give the same response, then it sounds more like the report on Shas is more reliable, considering it is now Haredi media making the accusation against Shas.