Thousands of protestors flocked to the streets in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem launching a general strike to show their anger after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fired his Defence Minister, Yoav Gallant who have expressed concern and called for a pause on the Government’s plan to overhaul the judiciary. The protests have been taking place for the last three months after the Benjamin Netanyahu-led coalition was sworn into power and his confidant, Justice Minister Yariv Levin unveiled the overhaul plans of pushing a broad judicial reform.
The move has led the largest labour union to declare a general strike, grounding flights, and closing banks, foreign embassies and government offices. It has even led to questioning by Israel’s top allies including the United States. The Prime Minister with his far-right allies also survived a no-confidence motion filed by the opposition with a narrow vote margin of 59-53.
The Judicial Reforms Proposed
The debate on Israel’s Supreme Court and the proposed Judicial reforms can be partly explained by the country’s legal system and an unwritten constitution. The court bases its decision on the British common law, evolving precedents from Israel, and a series of basic laws that provide a quasi-constitutional power. The supreme court is seen as an obstacle to the policies of the ultra-orthodox parties and many on the Israeli right have a long-standing hatred as they feel the institution is too powerful and against the settler movement and the Mizrahi population. The Israeli right for example has never forgiven the court for its decisions related to Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005 which was later seen to be a strategic disaster. Apart from this, the former Indian Ambassador to Israel, Navtej Sarna pointed out in an article that ‘the judiciary has also opposed the extension of the special privileges to the ultra-orthodox Jewish community from compulsory military services that would, in turn, allow them to focus on Torah studies.’
The judicial activism of the Supreme Court started in the 1990s when the basic laws were deemed to be normal legislation and it gave itself the right to overrule the Knesset. Adv. Avraham Russell Shalev who is a researcher at the Kohelet Policy Forum, Legal Department in an interview with the authors talking about the hyper-activist Supreme Court mentioned, “The Knesset in 2006 licensed private companies to run prisons under certain regulations and the goal was to improve the conditions for the prisoners. The court however said that the definition of having a private prison, is you are violating human dignity. They first assumed the definition of human dignity and then they have to assume that human dignity is more important than all the considerations that the Knesset took. It just shows an inappropriate interference in the democratic process.”
In the current proposed judicial reforms, the government is trying to change the makeup of a nine-member committee that selects judges for the court. This would give the appointees of government more power to select judges and the next president of the court. It would also cut down Supreme Court’s power to strike down laws that seem unconstitutional.
The other aspect of the reform is the override clause that would give the Knesset the power to strike down the Basic Laws and the rulings of the Supreme Court. The motivation for Benjamin Netanyahu as many would perceive it to be is a person who is himself fighting corruption charges but Russel had a different opinion. He mentioned that “Netanyahu’s trial is in the district court and there has already been a judge assigned to him and any change in the judicial selection committee will only come into effect in the long term when the seats are declared vacant. It doesn’t affect his trial in any way.”
The demand of the Protestors
The military reservists and former generals who joined the protests feared that the Supreme Court would not have the power to strike down illegal military orders and scrutinise government actions. The allies of Netanyahu being dominated by hardliners who opposed Palestinian Statehood and have advocated for arming ordinary Israelis could use the reforms in the judiciary as impunity for more aggressive policies in the West Bank. The military leaders further warned that a decline in reservists, who form a key part of the air force pilot corps, could affect the military’s operational capacity.
Omer Shakhar, a student at the Hebrew University who has been protesting for the last two months with his sixty-five-year-old mother mentioned that “these reforms will destroy the democratic structure of Israel. The Government being majoritarian will pass laws that are against minorities and these reforms will destroy every check and balance in society.”
Benjamin Netanyahu finally gave in to the pressure, addressing the nation that he would put the judicial reforms on hold for a month and seek a compromise with his political opponents ‘to avoid a civil war.’ While many viewed this as a relief, others viewed it as a pause for a month to quell the civil unrest before they are reintroduced again in the Knesset when it convenes at the end of April. It is impossible for Netanyahu though to remain in power for long without the reforms introduced especially when he has wielded his power around the ultra-orthodox parties.
Ratnadeep Chakraborty is the Co-founder of an independent media company that covers the spheres of strategic affairs called The Honest Critique. He is also the host of the podcast series, Line of Truth. Ratnadeep writes on issues related to the developments in West Asia particularly Israel, terrorism and non-state Militant actors.
Ekampreet Kaur has pursued her Bachelor of Arts in Social Sciences from Guru Nanak Dev University. She has hosted shows on strategic affairs for The Honest Critique and enjoys writing about global diplomacy, narcoterrorism and international organisations.