In a potential groundbreaking development, a leaked draft decision from the High Court of Justice indicates the likely overturning of the highly contested reasonableness law, a key component of the government’s recent judicial overhaul program. If this decision materializes, it would mark a significant moment as Israel’s top court nullifies a quasi-constitutional Basic Law for the first time.
The leaked information, disclosed on Wednesday evening, reveals that the unprecedented 15-justice panel is divided, with eight justices in favor of annulling the law and seven against, as reported by Channel 12 news. This revelation has triggered swift and heated reactions, with coalition members criticizing the anticipated decision, asserting that it undermines the national unity demonstrated during the ongoing conflict with Hamas.
The reasonableness law, an amendment to Basic Law: The Judiciary passed in July, prohibits all courts, including the High Court, from scrutinizing or opposing government and ministerial decisions based on the judicial standard of “reasonableness.” This standard empowers the High Court to nullify such decisions if it identifies substantial issues with the considerations or the weight given to them.
A pivotal hearing in September saw all 15 justices engaging in a 13-hour debate that delved into the core of Israel’s governing system and the balance of power among its branches. Those opposing the law, including Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, argued that it jeopardized key safeguards for Israeli democracy and tilted the balance of power in favor of the government at the judiciary’s expense.
Proponents of the law contended that the existing standard provided the court with excessive authority to interfere in policy decisions, allowing it to substitute the majority’s will with its own worldview. The right-wing coalition and legal conservatives emphasized that Basic Laws are beyond judicial review, asserting that the court lacks the authority to void them.
The Judicial Authority’s spokesperson department issued a statement on Wednesday evening, condemning the leak and emphasizing that the ruling is yet to be finalized. They expressed grave concern about unauthorized disclosures and pledged not to comment further until the completion of the writing process.
Former Chief Justice Esther Hayut, who retired a month after the September hearing, reportedly supported striking down the legislation, stating that the law deviates from the ‘outline constitution’ and should have required broad agreement, not just a slim coalition majority.
As the nation awaits the court’s final decision, the leaked opinions from justices provide a glimpse into the deep-seated divisions within the court. The anticipated ruling, with potential implications for Israel’s democratic foundations, has sparked calls for unity and responsibility amid the ongoing national challenges.