Diopolis wrote:El Lazaro wrote:Guess what’s back? Well, it’s in the title. Here’s a summary (para 1) and recent events (para 2):
The judicial overhaul was halted for months as the coalition and opposition opened negotiations to de-escalate the tense standoff over concerns of political unrest and even civil war. To recap, the overhaul as proposed earlier this year would de facto abolish the Supreme Court’s powers, allowing a bare majority in the Knesset to consolidate total power. This is partly motivated by the personal interests of politicians (mainly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) to block ongoing corruption proceedings, but far-right coalition partners have also lambasted Supreme Court rulings in favor of human rights and democratic institutions. Regardless, the opposition has characterized the authoritarian push as dictatorial and extreme, and the process has even garnered unanticipated criticism from Israel’s allies.
So why is it back? Basically, tensions have flared this month over a Judicial Selections Committee dispute. The Committee, made up of a politicians and legal experts, chooses judges. Traditionally, an appointment would require 7 votes out of 3 government, 1 opposition, and 5 lawyer/judge members. A major part of the overhaul involves packing the Judicial Selections Committee (and thus, the Supreme Court) with cronies to prevent the unanimity hypothetically needed to enforce rulings, so when the coalition attempted to exclude the opposition from the panel, the opposition threatened to withdraw from compromise talks. In the secret vote on the appointments, several MKs broke ranks and hamstrung the attempt, frustrating Netanyahu and failing to fully resolve the issue. Netanyahu accused the opposition of acting in bad faith and unilaterally cancelled negotiations. Now, judicial overhaul has officially resumed, with the first proposed bill targeting the “extreme unreasonableness” standard, which was used earlier this year to bar the ministerial appointment of Shas leader and Likud ally Aryeh Deri for being a violation of his corruption plea deal. It’s not clear whether the most contentious changes will be reintroduced, but that hasn’t prevented nationwide protests from erupting once again
https://apnews.com/article/israel-polit ... caf01d6d25
https://apnews.com/article/israel-netan ... d0fd8c2a17
https://www.timesofisrael.com/knesset-r ... ness-test/
It's worth noting that although Netanyahu is not a particularly trustworthy figure to actually do so, the Israeli supreme court does have to be reigned in somehow.
If anything, the executive is too powerful. A Supreme Court “reigned in” under the current system just means the last safeguard against dictatorship would be even weaker against any corrupt or authoritarian leader, not just Netanyahu. I would hazard a guess you’re not in favor of doing the same to the SCOTUS, an actual threat to democracy and human rights with more partisanship and fewer limits, to personally give Biden unlimited power to use as he sees fit.
There is a legitimate reason to oppose the somewhat vague powers of the Court, even if the Knesset can threaten to demolish it with a simple majority for any reason, but this isn’t a judicial problem; it’s a constitutional one. Clearly defining the Court’s powers and strengthening the separation of powers would improve the judiciary instead of leaving Israel teetering on the edge of autocracy after every election. A written constitution could also introduce federalism to further decentralize power and lower the stakes of political power struggles and culture wars. I don’t think it’s very likely to pass (certainly not under this government), but it is an idea worth taking seriously after the near-total breakdown of the political system.
