The internal fight over judicial reform in Israel, which threatened to trigger a civil war a few weeks ago, could soon be resolved in a compromise that enshrines basic civil rights and limits the power of the Supreme Court.
Reports, purportedly from sources close to ongoing negotiations between the government and the opposition, suggest that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may get what he wants — checks and balances for the all-powerful courts — in exchange for what the opposition says it wants, which is to see the rights of minorities, women, secularists, and LGBT people formally protected by law against infringement by religious parties.
The Times of Israel reported Tuesday:
Negotiation teams for the coalition and opposition parties over the government’s controversial judicial overhaul program discussed the possibility of anchoring in law fundamental civil rights on Monday, amid efforts to hammer out a compromise on the shake-up bid.
…
One of the key arguments of opponents to the government’s judicial overhaul package is that it would give the government and Knesset almost unrestrained power and remove the checks on such power provided by the High Court of Justice.
Anchoring fundamental rights in law would constitute a major step toward alleviating these fears.
Israel does not have a written constitution. Instead, it relies on a set of thirteen “Basic Laws” that establish the basic structure of the government. One such Basic Law, “Human Dignity and Liberty (1992),” provides a few fundamental human rights, but does not elaborate. Changes to that Basic Law could expand protections for groups that feel threatened by the growing electoral power of conservative parties, especially religious ones.
Tensions between secular Jews — who are disproportionately represented in the country’s elite — and religious Jews in Israel have existed for decades. Some religious Jews also seek exemption from military service, adding to the resentment. Yet the high birthrate of religious Jewish communities has meant that there are more and more religious voters, and parties that seek to advance religious laws and values have growing political clout.
These tensions, more than the substance of the judicial reforms, appear to be partly responsible for the large-scale protests that greeted Netanyahu’s proposals earlier this year. The judiciary has been a bastion of left-wing and secular power; hence the left has been determined to elevate it.
Yet far from being a “dictator,” as critics of Netanyahu claimed, he could emerge as a lawgiver, the framer of a new constitutional era in Israeli politics.
It is also likely that the external threats Israel currently faces may be increasing the pressure on all political parties to come to an agreement. Iran is nearing a nuclear weapon — with the apparent acquiescence of the Biden administration; Iranian-backed terrorist groups are launching rockets into Israel; and Palestinian terrorists have carried out several recent attacks. Israel’s physical survival may depend on political compromise.
Netanyahu rejected an earlier compromise floated by Israel’s ceremonial president, Isaac Herzog, because it effectively excluded limits on the power of the judiciary. But the negotiations at the president’s residence may yet bear fruit.
Last month, Netanyahu agreed to pause the reforms to allow time for negotiations, but said they would be passed by the end of the next legislative session if the opposition refused to come to the table.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the new biography, Rhoda: ‘Comrade Kadalie, You Are Out of Order’. He is also the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.