In a pivotal decision on January 1, Israel’s Supreme Court dealt a blow to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by overturning a key component of his controversial judicial overhaul. This decision has the potential to reignite deep-seated divisions within Israeli society, which had temporarily subsided amid the ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza.
The judicial overhaul, championed by Netanyahu, faced significant opposition and triggered mass protests against the government before being overshadowed by the military confrontation with Hamas. The court’s recent decision to strike down a law preventing judges from deeming government decisions “unreasonable” has the potential to reopen the fault lines that had rattled the country.
Netanyahu’s Overhaul Rejected: Israel’s Supreme Court Decision
The overturned law, passed in July, was the first step in a broader plan to overhaul the Israeli justice system. Its aim was to prevent judges from striking down government decisions they deemed unreasonable. Critics argued that removing the standard of reasonability could pave the way for corruption and inappropriate appointments based on political affiliations rather than qualifications.
The Supreme Court’s decision, reached by a narrow 8-7 vote, cited “severe and unprecedented harm to the core character of the State of Israel as a democratic country.” Additionally, in a 12-3 decision, the justices asserted their authority to overturn “Basic Laws,” which are crucial pieces of legislation serving as a quasi-constitution for Israel.
The court’s ruling is a setback for Netanyahu and his hard-line allies, who advocated for the national legislature, rather than the high court, to have the final say on the legality of legislation and other critical decisions. The justices asserted that the Knesset, or Parliament, does not possess “omnipotent” power, challenging the government’s attempts to concentrate power in the hands of elected officials.
Netanyahu and his allies proposed the sweeping overhaul plan shortly after taking office, seeking to limit the power of judges across various dimensions, from parliamentary review to the appointment process. While they argued that these changes would enhance democracy by curbing the authority of unelected judges, opponents viewed it as a power grab and an assault on a crucial watchdog.
Before the military conflict with Hamas took center stage, hundreds of thousands of Israelis participated in weekly protests against the government. Notably, military reservists, including fighter pilots and members of elite units, vowed to cease reporting for duty if the judicial overhaul proceeded. While these reservists returned to duty after the October 7 attacks, the fate of the protests remains uncertain if the overhaul efforts are reignited.
The protests had underscored the potential impact on national unity and military readiness if soldiers refused to report for duty. Israel’s system relies on the Prime Minister governing through a majority coalition in Parliament, granting control over the executive and legislative branches. As such, the Supreme Court’s oversight role becomes crucial, making attempts to weaken the judiciary a source of concern for those seeking to preserve checks and balances.
Also Read: Escalating Tensions in the Red Sea: US Navy Thwarts Houthi Attacks on Shipping
Critics argue that Netanyahu’s push to weaken the judiciary is an attempt to erode the country’s checks and balances and consolidate power over the independent third branch of government. His allies, which include ultranationalist and religious parties, have a range of contentious stances, from supporting West Bank settlement construction to limiting the rights of LGBTQ+ people and Palestinians.
The United States had previously urged Netanyahu to put the judicial overhaul plans on hold and seek a broad consensus across the political spectrum. The court’s decision was particularly significant as its outgoing president, Esther Hayut, retired on Monday, marking her last day on the job.