Israel’s parliament ratified new legislation this week that rolls back some Supreme Court powers, despite mass protests and U.S. misgivings.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the changes are needed to rein in an over-interventionist court, but critics accuse him of authoritarianism. Here are details on the crisis:
THE ‘REASONABLENESS CLAUSE’
The new legislation is an amendment that removes one, but not all, of the tools the Supreme Court has for quashing government and ministers’ decisions. Up until now, if the court deemed an executive decision “unreasonable”, it could void it. Once the bill is in effect, judges will no longer be able to do this, though they will still be able to rule against government based on other legal grounds.
WHAT WILL CHANGE NOW?
In the immediate term, probably very little. Law experts and legal advisers to the government and parliament have, however, warned that it will open the door to corruption because it makes it easier for government as a whole or individual ministers to hire and fire officials for potentially wrong reasons.
Critics fear it will compromise gate-keepers who help keep government in check. They note civil servants like the attorney-general or ministry legal advisers could more easily be replaced with “yes-men”. The government says it has no such designs. The change, it says, will facilitate governance and make it easier for democratically elected officials to pursue their policy.
ABUSES OF POWER?
Critics also warn that eventually, knowing their measures can no longer be challenged for not being within the bounds of reason, ministers may not scrutinize their own policies thoroughly enough to guard against injustice. In the longer term, a weaker judiciary could be bad for business and harm Israel’s legal defences abroad. But that would also depend on whether – and how – further judicial changes will be made.
FEAR FOR DEMOCRACY
There is uproar in Israel over the passage of the law because many fear that this is just the first step down a slippery slope endangering democracy.
The government, which includes religious and nationalist parties, announced an entire legislation package in January meant to overhaul the judiciary and some of its hard-line ministers want to proceed with more sweeping changes despite the protests.
The “reasonableness clause” was pushed through parliament within a month. The speed at which a change to Israel’s constitutional foundations was made and the fact that it was done in the face of fierce objection in parliament and on the streets has caused further alarm.
Israel’s democratic foundations are relatively fragile. It has no constitution, in the one-chamber Knesset the government holds a 64-56 majority, and the president’s office is largely ceremonial. So the Supreme Court is seen as crucial for protecting civil rights and the rule of law.
NEXT STEPS
Netanyahu has said some of the legislation package has been scrapped for good but that he still wants to change the way judges are selected. The big question is whether any further changes will be made with a broad consensus, as urged by U.S. President Joe Biden.
Netanyahu has set November as a target date to agree judicial changes with the opposition parties but there is no guarantee that will happen. If it does, then it would likely go a long way toward calming Israel’s Western allies and reassuring foreign investors and international credit agencies spooked by the government’s campaign. It would also give Israelis a much desired respite from one of their worst domestic crises in decades.
NETANYAHU’S TRIAL
Netanyahu is arguing his innocence in a long-running corruption trial. His critics fear that he will try to use judicial changes to void his case or influence its outcome. Netanyahu has strongly denied any connection between his trial and an overhaul he says will only serve Israel’s democracy. He has promised Israel’s judiciary will remain strong and independent and that no harm will come to civil rights.
(Reuters)