Understanding the Controversy Around Israel’s Judicial Reforms

For the past seven months, Israel has been abuzz with demonstrations as tens of thousands of citizens rally against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s controversial plans to revamp the judiciary and lessen the influence of the Supreme Court.

On Monday, a major part of this legislative reform passed. A measure disallowing judges from invalidating government decisions on the basis of being “unreasonable” received legislative approval.

The following is an in-depth exploration of the reform plan, and the reasons behind the largest and most persistent demonstrations in the nation’s history.

RELATED NEWS
First major leap in Netanyahu’s disputed judicial reform sparks further divisions
Israeli doctors disclose Netanyahu’s chronic cardiac condition after pacemaker surgery
As Israel’s far-right government continues with its judicial reforms, protests intensify

THE REFORMS EXPLAINED

The reform intends to introduce extensive changes aimed at limiting the jurisdiction of the judiciary.

The legislative package consists of a bill that would empower a simple parliamentary majority to reject Supreme Court decisions. Another proposal gives parliament the ultimate authority in judge appointments.

According to Netanyahu’s ultranationalist and ultra-Orthodox religious allies, this reform package aims to give more power to elected officials, diminishing the power of unelected judges.

However, protesters – a diverse group of Israeli citizens – are concerned that these reforms could edge Israel closer to autocracy. They argue that it is a power shift motivated by Netanyahu’s personal and political disputes. Netanyahu, who faces corruption charges, and his allies are believed to be behind these changes.

A bill passed on Monday curtails the Supreme Court’s authority to overrule government decisions deemed “unreasonable.”

Advocates of the reforms argue that the current “reasonability” standard vests too much power in judges, overshadowing the decisions of elected representatives. Detractors, however, believe that the removal of this standard could potentially allow the government to pass arbitrary decisions, improperly hire or fire individuals, and pave the way for corruption.

Protesters accuse Netanyahu and his allies of seeking to amend the law to appoint their supporters to government positions and specifically to dismiss the nation’s independent attorney general, suggests Amir Fuchs, a senior researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute, a think tank based in Jerusalem.

The proposed measures “create obstacles in conducting oversight” over arbitrary decisions of elected representatives, stated Yohanan Plesner, the institute’s president. “This is one facet of a wider scheme by the government to debilitate the checks and balances.”

In response, Netanyahu rejects claims that his plan would undermine Israel’s democratic principles. “This is an attempt to mislead you over something that has no basis in reality,” he said.

WHY ARE THE PROTESTS ADAMANT ABOUT PROTECTING THE JUDICIARY?

The judiciary plays a crucial role in maintaining executive power due to Israel’s relatively weaker system of checks and balances.

Unlike the U.S., where Congress, comprising two houses, operates independently of the president, the Israeli Prime Minister and his majority coalition in parliament work hand-in-hand.

Therefore, according to constitutional law professor Amichai Cohen, the judiciary is “the only check on governmental power.”

Since Israel lacks a formal constitution and has limited local governance, power is mostly centralized in the parliament. The “basic laws” — foundational laws that serve as an informal constitution — can be modified at any moment by a mere majority.

With these reforms, Cohen asserts that the Israeli parliament threatens to amass more power by weakening the judiciary.

“The government can do whatever it wants, because it controls the ability to change even the basic laws,” Cohen said.

Historically, the Israeli judiciary has protected minority rights, ranging from Palestinian citizens of Israel to noncitizens and African asylum seekers, according to Cohen.

Critics of the reforms say that the government, led by a male-dominated coalition advocating for full annexation of the occupied West Bank, discrimination against LGBTQ+ people and Palestinian citizens of Israel, and restriction of women’s rights, will obtain near-total control by weakening the judiciary.

“It will be a hollow democracy,” predicted Fuchs.

DID NETANYAHU HALT THIS PLAN?

In the months following Netanyahu’s announcement of his plan, protests erupted in major cities, business leaders voiced their opposition, and most significantly, military reservists in Israel’s air force and other key units threatened to stop reporting for duty if it passed.

These protests led Netanyahu to temporarily suspend the reform in March and start negotiations with opposition lawmakers. However, these talks collapsed last month, and in June, Netanyahu declared the reform would proceed.

Protesters allege that Netanyahu’s broader goals haven’t changed, despite altering his tactics. He’s proceeding more cautiously and slowly to minimize opposition.

“The government got smarter,” said Josh Drill, a spokesman for the protest movement. “They saw the fallout of trying to ram the overhaul through, and they decided instead to do it piece by piece.”

WHAT’S THE FUTURE?

A civil society group has announced plans to challenge the new law in the Supreme Court.

Fuchs mentioned that the court could issue a “temporary writ” to prevent the law from taking effect until a proper review is conducted.

He believes that the government will likely respect such an order. “But if they won’t, we will have a constitutional crisis right away.”

Meanwhile, it’s expected that the protests shaking the country will only intensify.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Israel’s Judicial Reforms

More about Israel’s Judicial Reforms

• Israel’s Proposed Judicial Reforms
• Protests Against Judicial Reforms in Israel
• Understanding Israel’s System of Checks and Balances
• Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Response to Criticisms
• Potential Impacts of the Judicial Reforms