Unveiling proposals to “reform” Israel’s judiciary, Justice Minister Yariv Levin sounded the death knell for our thriving but insufficiently established democracy on Wednesday night.
A Likud ally of newly returned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who took office only last Thursday, Levin described his plan as strengthening democracy, strengthening the judicial system and “rebalancing the three branches of government.”
In fact, the proposals he unveiled were the “first phase” of a “long overdue” overhaul of Israel’s top court to protect any and all Israelis from excesses and abuses by any ruling majority. almost completely removed the capacity of
Central to his reform, he said, was to legislate an “override clause” for the Knesset, under which high court judges would be fundamentally constrained in seeking to overturn laws and government decisions they deem discriminatory, undemocratic and undemocratic. looks like. / or in violation of the quasi-constitutional Basic Laws of Israel.
Once his proposals become law, he declared, the High Court would be expressly prevented from deliberating and ruling on those basic laws, and would be permitted only by a panel of all judges of the court and undefined “special majority” the Knesset would be able to overrule the law. , What’s more, he explained, the Knesset would be able to re-legislate legislation blocked by the court with the support of just 61 MKs in the 120-seat house. Only if all 15 justices unanimously agree to strike down a law, the Knesset will be barred from re-enacting it during that term of parliament. (Many members in today’s opposition may support an override clause, but a carefully weighed one would also require a substantial proportion of opposition votes to re-enact court-blocked legislation.)
Levin also proposed restructuring the panel that first chooses the justices, with changes to the selection committee, which again, gives ultimate power to the political majority of the day. As things stand, “judges choose themselves in back rooms,” he falsely claimed.
Levin argued that the judges had brought this sterilization upon themselves by interfering and needlessly interfering with the work of Israel’s elected politicians. (The top court has struck down 22 laws in the state’s 75-year history.) The court’s increased involvement in government decisions and Knesset legislation has “historically undermined public confidence in the court system, has weakened and harmed democracy, he alleged.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin held a press conference on January 4, 2023, in the Knesset, revealing his plans for radical changes to Israel’s judicial system. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)
In fact, given the limitations and peculiarities of the Israeli system, the Court has played an important role in defending democracy.
While Levin distinguished in his remarks between the executive and the legislature, presenting them as two different branches of government in Israel, they equate to the same thing. A like-minded ruling majority – such as the 64-strong coalition Netanyahu now heads – can push any legislation through parliament. Furthermore, Israel has no constitution, no bill of rights, no second parliamentary chamber. The High Court is thus the only brake.
The importance of that role has only been underscored in recent days, with the rise of Netanyahu’s right-wing, far-right and ultra-Orthodox coalition, whose members’ various agendas include proposed laws that would make service providers less customers, customers, Patients can be allowed to refuse. , etc., if they felt it was necessary for their religious beliefs – clearly an example of legally binding discrimination which the High Court could be relied upon to oppose.
Apparently, Levin unveiled his proposals on the eve of a High Court hearing on the legitimacy of Arya Derry, leader of the coalition’s ultra-conservative Shas party, who was returning to ministerial office. Derry negotiated a suspended sentence less than a year ago in a plea bargain for tax crimes, which was accepted by a Jerusalem magistrate’s court only on the understanding that he was retiring from public life.
Israel’s attorney general told the court earlier on Wednesday that she could not defend Deri’s appointment as interior minister, health minister and deputy prime minister, as it was “extremely inappropriate”.
Among the proposals unveiled by Levin was to rule out the notion of “reasonableness” as a valid legal test.
Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives at the Jerusalem District Court for a hearing on his corruption trial May 11, 2022. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)
Netanyahu chose not to appear with Levin when he unveiled his revolutionary proposals. But the prime minister is a major beneficiary.
Netanyahu is on trial in three criminal cases, denies wrongdoing in all of them, and insists he has been framed by state prosecutors.
Some of his coalition partners are pushing for legislation to retroactively remove the charge of “fraud and breach of trust” on all three counts from the criminal code, and for a serving prime minister to be punished for alleged crimes committed while in office. To provide retrospective immunity – a so-called “French law.” Since Israel, unlike France, has no term limits for its political leader, such laws would protect Netanyahu as long as he remains in power.
The High Court can also generally be relied upon to prevent such legislative abuse. Under Levin’s proposals, it is likely to be both unwilling and unable to do so.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Esther Hyatt (C) and fellow judges during a hearing on October 6, 2022. (Jonathan Sindel/Flash90)
Underscoring the main flaws and fraudulences in Levin’s proposals and their presentation is the fact that, with the 64 votes he unveiled on Wednesday night as proposals to be discussed “in depth” in the Knesset, in fact I can almost be rammed through the law should an alliance be chosen immediately.
Indeed, the Netanyahu-led coalition also swiftly changed elements of the misleadingly named Basic Laws in a legislative blitz last month to meet the demands of some of its constituents.
Opposition leaders rallied on Wednesday night to label Levin’s proposals as “a political coup”.
This may sound strange, considering that the people who allegedly staged it are already in power. But the point is this: once these “reforms” begin, those in power must never abandon them. There would be no other branch of government to oppose them.
