Over the course of more than eight months, there has been intense political and legal turmoil surrounding a constitutional Basic Law in Israel, known as the “reasonableness law.” This law, an amendment to the Basic Law: The Judiciary, was passed by the Knesset in July and restricts the High Court’s authority to assess the “reasonableness” of government actions. For the first time in its history, the High Court is tasked with judging the constitutionality of a Basic Law, which limits its own powers.
This situation has raised concerns of a “constitutional crisis.” The outcome remains uncertain: If a compromise is reached in the Knesset that still curtails the court’s powers, will the court accept it? Conversely, if the court strikes down the law entirely, as many expect, will the government, led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, comply?
Justice Minister Yariv Levin has strongly criticized the court’s involvement in determining its own powers, labeling it a threat to democracy and the Knesset’s status. The article suggests that even if a crisis is averted in this specific case, another High Court decision awaits regarding a March amendment to the Basic Laws that made it harder to suspend prime ministers, potentially impacting Netanyahu’s future.
The article emphasizes the pivotal nature of this moment in Israeli politics, highlighting how the government’s hasty attempt to reform the judiciary without building public trust has backfired. It also notes the shift in public opinion, as many liberals who once worried about the court’s powers are now more concerned about the government’s actions.
While a constitutional crisis may be looming, the article argues that the government is likely to lose such a clash politically, as polls suggest it could lose significant support even within its own party. Netanyahu is inclined to seek a compromise to avoid a crisis that could harm his political standing.
The article also discusses the broader implications of this situation, highlighting the importance of public trust in any fundamental changes to the judiciary or constitutional order. It suggests that the government’s failure to build such trust has led to its political weakness.
Additionally, the article touches on the court’s willingness to rule on its own powers, a rare occurrence in Israel. It outlines two legal arguments for striking down the reasonableness law: one related to the Knesset’s constitutive power and the other to protecting fundamental constitutional principles. However, it notes that both arguments would expand the court’s review powers, potentially intensifying the political dispute.
Ultimately, the article raises concerns about the court potentially overreaching and warns that any decision it makes may not resolve the crisis but instead prolong it. It calls for the need to build public trust in constitutional reforms and suggests that a true constitution with broad support is essential for navigating the current impasse effectively. However, it acknowledges that both the political leadership and the court seem unlikely to take the necessary steps to achieve this goal, leaving the crisis unresolved.