Israel’s highest court is currently listening to requests to challenge a recently passed law that makes it more difficult to remove a prime minister from office.
Eleven out of the 15 judges in the Supreme Court were listening to the arguments on Thursday. In the next two months, the court will listen to arguments on three cases that question laws made by the Benjamin Netanyahu government this year.
Thursday’s petition has a big impact on Netanyahu personally.
According to the law, only the prime minister or the cabinet with a two-thirds majority can say someone is not suitable to be a leader. This can only happen if the person is physically or mentally unable to do the job. The cabinet’s decision would need to be approved by a two-thirds majority in the parliament, called the Knesset. The amendment is a modification to one of Israel’s Basic Laws, which are similar to a constitution.
The change was approved before the government began making new laws to change the judicial system. This change has caused disagreements in the country and led to protests because people believe it harms Israel’s democracy and makes its judiciary weaker.
The people who spoke in the hearing on Thursday believe that the amendment was passed only to help Netanyahu, who is currently being tried for corruption. They think this is a misuse of the power given to representatives by the people. According to the Supreme Court, this is one reason why they can cancel changes made to a Basic Law. However, the court has never declared a Basic Law or a change to it as invalid.
Yiktzhak Burt, a lawyer representing the Knesset, admitted to the Supreme Court on Thursday that the law in question did personally help the prime minister. However, he argued that the Knesset had the authority to pass it because they were elected by the people, and he urged the court not to cancel the law. He agreed that the law had problems, but they weren’t serious enough to remove it.
On Thursday, Supreme Court President Esther Hayut explained that the court was not talking about canceling the law, but instead delaying when it would be put into effect.
Earlier this month, the highest court in the country listened to discussions about a new law, created in July, that removed its power to prevent government actions judges deem as “unreasonable. ” This law was also an alteration to an important legal rule. The third request is about Justice Minister Yariv Levin not wanting to have a meeting with the committee that selects judges because they cannot agree on who should be in the committee.
Amir Fuchs, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute, said to CNN that the Supreme Court is facing more challenges to amendments than ever before.
“We’ve never had so many court hearings happening one after another. ” This situation is a very rare and never seen before crisis in our government’s rules and laws,” Fuchs said.
Before this law was changed, there was no written rule that explained how a prime minister could be kicked out of their position for being incapable of doing their job. However, Fuchs mentioned that there were some previous cases where the attorney general could make that decision.
I think we had a bad deal before. It was not clear or specific enough. “It requested a change,” Fuchs explained. “But it’s very obvious that the reason behind this law was completely personal. ”
This is because people signed papers asking to declare Netanyahu not suitable for his job because of his ongoing trial for corruption. He is the first Israeli prime minister who is currently in office to go to court as a defendant. He is being tried for accusations of fraud, breaking trust, and bribery. He says he didn’t do anything wrong.
As a way to still be the prime minister while being on trial, Netanyahu agreed to declare any conflicts of interest in 2020 as part of a deal with the court.
The attorney general decided that Netanyahu could not participate in decisions that impact the court system, such as the judicial overhaul. Some people argue that certain changes in the overhaul could make it easier for Netanyahu to avoid being punished for corruption.
Earlier this year, the Justice Minister Levin announced that the government has plans to make changes to the judicial system. At that time, Netanyahu said he couldn’t participate or help because of a conflict-of-interest declaration.
But in March, shortly after the change to make it harder to remove a prime minister from office was approved, Netanyahu said he would take part.
“Until now, I haven’t been able to do anything,” said the prime minister. We are in a ridiculous situation where if I had done my job and intervened in the changes to the justice system, I would have been declared unable to continue serving. Tonight, I want to say that I’ve had enough and I cannot accept this any longer. I will participate.
A first meeting with three judges has already taken place for this case. On Thursday, the Supreme Court listened to arguments again. This time, 11 out of the 15 judges were present.
Normally, the attorney general would present the government’s arguments in a hearing at the Supreme Court. However, AG Gali Bahrav-Miara chose not to do so. She agrees with the people who signed the petition that the amendment should not continue, just like she said during the meeting about the law of “reasonableness” earlier this month.
The judges might reject the amendment and say that the parliament misused their power. This means that the legislation is not being passed for regular reasons, but for the benefit of a particular person, which is Netanyahu.
Fuchs observed that the bill was introduced and approved very quickly, and the comments made in parliament clearly indicated that the law was created to safeguard Netanyahu.
The Supreme Court might say that the law is not in effect currently and will only be in effect when the next parliament starts. That could be a solution to a difficult problem in the constitution.
“It helps with most of the problem because if they decide it will only apply in the next Knesset, it means it won’t solve any personal problems for Netanyahu. It also gives the Knesset time to reconsider the arrangement,” explained Fuchs.
The court needs to make its decision by January 12, 2024, because the judges who are handling the case will be leaving their positions.
The court has to make a decision before that time about the petition against the law that removed the court’s power to say government actions are “unreasonable. ” This is a bigger challenge, and all 15 of the current Supreme Court justices are considering the case for the first time. The decision on that request is likely to take more time compared to the decision being discussed on Thursday.
Furthermore, the highest court in the country is set to consider a case about the justice minister’s delay in organizing the group to choose new judges for the Supreme Court. Netanyahu’s government wants to change how judges are chosen in Israel so that politicians have more influence.
The group was supposed to have a meeting last week, but Levin decided to delay it.
“It’s really important, even though it’s about administrative matters and not a complaint against a fundamental law,” Fuchs explained about the challenge. This is because Levin might have to obey a court decision regarding a crucial part of the judicial reform.
However, there could be a bigger problem after the Supreme Court makes its decisions, as Fuchs explained, if Netanyahu and his government decide to ignore them. Despite being asked multiple times by CNN and other media outlets, he has not made a firm decision to obey or comply with their requests.
The government has the power to decide whether to accept this or not. Fuchs explained that just because Netanyahu is avoiding answering the question about whether he will follow the decision, it doesn’t mean he won’t.