A momentous legal showdown took place in the High Court of Justice, involving all 15 justices and attorneys representing both sides of the government’s reasonableness limitation law. The heated debate delved into the heart of Israel’s constitutional identity and democracy, lasting over 13 hours.
Tensions escalated when MK Simcha Rothman, Chairman of the Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, criticized the court as an “oligarchy” with no authority to overturn the majority’s will. Meanwhile, the government’s attorney attempted to downplay the constitutional significance of Israel’s Declaration of Independence to counter claims that the court could annul parts of Israel’s constitutional framework under extreme circumstances.
The central questions revolved around whether the High Court has the jurisdiction to review Israel’s quasi-constitutional Basic Laws, including the reasonableness law, and whether this legislation severely damages Israel’s democratic character to warrant its annulment.
Several justices indicated their disagreement with the government’s argument that the court lacks authority to review Basic Laws, questioning whether the Knesset can pass undemocratic laws without judicial oversight.
However, conservative justices challenged the notion that the court could strike down laws of a constitutional nature. Even more centrist and liberal justices expressed skepticism about whether the reasonableness law is damaging enough to justify its annulment.
While there seemed to be a majority view supporting the court’s right to review Basic Laws, there was doubt about whether this specific law should be struck down. Some justices suggested that other tools of administrative law could be used to moderate the law’s impact.
The dispute reached a critical point when the government’s attorney argued against the constitutional weight of the Declaration of Independence, leading to a sharp exchange with the justices. Some justices demanded to know the source of the Knesset’s authority to legislate Basic Laws, while others expressed skepticism about the court’s authority in this matter.
The outcome of this historic hearing remains uncertain, with the court expected to issue its verdict in the coming weeks or months. Nonetheless, the clash highlights a deep divide within Israel’s political landscape concerning democracy and the governance of the Jewish state.