(Rightallegiance.com) – Israel’s Supreme Court has invalidated a crucial element of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposed judicial overhaul. The court’s decision, delivered on Monday, has the potential to reopen existing societal divides in Israel that predate the ongoing conflict with Hamas.
The planned overhaul prompted extensive protests and raised the specter of a constitutional crisis between the judicial and legislative branches. It also created fissures within Israel’s powerful military. Despite these divisions being set aside during the conflict with Hamas, Monday’s court ruling could revive tensions even amid the ongoing war.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin, an ally of Netanyahu and the architect of the overhaul, criticized the court’s decision, stating it goes against the unity needed during wartime. While not specifying immediate plans to revive the overhaul, Levin affirmed the government’s determination to persist in its objectives with restraint and responsibility.
The court’s decision, passed by a narrow 8-7 majority, annulled a law enacted in July preventing judges from nullifying government decisions deemed “unreasonable.” Critics argued that this move by Netanyahu could pave the way for corruption and improper appointments.
This law was the initial step in a broader overhaul of Israel’s justice system, temporarily halted after the October 7 attack by Hamas militants. The court’s decision, citing “severe and unprecedented harm” to Israel’s democratic character, is a setback for Netanyahu and his allies, who advocate for parliamentary supremacy over judicial decisions.
The ruling, with a 12-3 majority, also affirmed the court’s authority to overturn “Basic Laws,” crucial legislative components serving as a quasi-constitution for Israel. This challenges Netanyahu’s assertion that the national legislature, not the high court, should have the final say on legislative legality.
The government may choose to defy the court’s decision, potentially leading to a constitutional showdown over the ultimate authority of the branches of government. The outgoing president of the court, Esther Hayut, issued this decision on her last day in office.
Netanyahu’s plan to reshape the judiciary, announced a year ago, aims to limit judges’ powers, alter the Supreme Court’s oversight of parliamentary decisions, and change the judge appointment process. Supporters argue these changes strengthen democracy by reducing unelected judges’ authority, while opponents see it as a power grab and an attack on a vital watchdog.
The Movement for Quality Government in Israel, opposing the legislation, hailed the court’s ruling as a significant victory for democracy. Before the conflict with Hamas, widespread protests against the government, involving military reservists, had erupted. While reservists returned to duty after the conflict, the potential revival of the overhaul might reignite protests, impacting national unity and military readiness.
In Israel’s governance system, the prime minister controls both the executive and legislative branches through a parliamentary majority. Weakening the judiciary, critics argue, undermines the country’s checks and balances, consolidating power over the independent third branch of government.
Netanyahu’s allies, including ultranationalist and religious parties, have expressed grievances against the court, advocating for policies such as increased West Bank settlements, annexation of occupied territories, military draft exemptions for ultra-Orthodox men, and limitations on the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals and Palestinians. The U.S. had previously encouraged Netanyahu to pause the plans and seek a broader consensus across the political spectrum.