Who’s right in Israel’s authoritarian overhaul frenzy?
Hint: Not the side that denies it's trying to install authoritarianism
The outrage spread on WhatsApp after Sara Netanyahu was spotted at a high-end hair salon in Tel Aviv. It was a day when hundreds of thousands had taken to the streets, braving stun grenades and water cannons to protest her husband’s efforts to install authoritarianism. Dozens had been arrested, and one man lost an ear.
A tsunami of terrifying liberals streamed to the salon and began to protest outside, shouting “Sara’s getting her hair styled while the country burns.” Three hours later, armed police and cavalry managed to disperse the crowd of several thousand and extract the first lady. First Gentleman Benjamin Netanyahu, her husband, then went on TV to compare the salon siege to a recent pogrom by Jewish settlers who torched a West Bank village and killed a Palestinian man.
A few days later, 37 of 40 reserve pilots in the Air Force’s most elite squadron announced they would boycott reserve duty to protest the prime minister’s planned “reforms,” and a letter signed by every living former commander of the Air Force called on the government to halt its moves. The communications minister, representing a party dedicated to prolonging the right of ultra-Orthodox Jews to dodge the draft, advised the pilots—who have exalted status in Israel—to “go to hell.” It was then reported that no pilots could be found to fly Netanyahu—and his wife, and their vast entourage—to Rome for official meetings; a patchwork solution was found by changing to another kind of plane.
Israel is rarely calm, but this is very much not normal.
Despite growing agitation in the country and abroad, the government is pressing on with its euphemistically termed “judicial reforms.” The discourse bristles with warnings of investor flight, brain drain, mass emigration, civil disobedience, and even civil war.
The bulk of the anger has focused on a so-called “override clause” that would enable a simple majority in the legislature to overturn decisions of the Supreme Court. But also on the table are proposals handing the ruling coalition total control over judicial appointments, imposing limits on the right to strike, and eliminating anti-corruption measures.
Opponents view this as a coup that would mutate Israel into a Putinesque fake democracy in which judges are puppets and government abuses go unchecked. The three-month-old government says it’s facing hysteria by sore losers who cannot accept a rebalancing of the branches of government that is widely desired and long overdue.
Who’s right? Is Israel about to become a Jewish version of Hungary and Turkey, where the government can trample the individual at will? As the country is a wealthy nuclear power that sits on a regional powder keg and provides much of the world’s tech innovation, it’s worth sifting through all the noise.
The government and its defenders say the Supreme Court has been too activist, implying it blocks security moves on the Palestinian front
According to the Israel Democracy Institute, in the 75 years of Israel’s existence the court challenged laws 22 times, mostly on civil rights. Only three rulings had a connection to the occupation. The court did not fundamentally challenge the legality of controlling millions of Palestinians without political rights for over a half-century while building towns for Jews around them.
As chairman of the Foreign Press Association I was involved in several appeals to the Supreme Court to overrule the authorities on various matters involving access; it generally proved a rubber stamp.
It’s true that the court, by its very existence, checked the worst potential abuses. This both served as a valve for Palestinian rage and kept potential international meddlers—like prosecutors from the Hague—off Israel’s back.
The government notes that US presidents select judges, and Canada has an override clause
The (flawed) US system suffers politicized judicial appointments, but it also boasts a constitution that guarantees human, civil, and minority rights, as well as a bicameral legislature that acts as an additional check on abuses and whose members are beholden to voters directly and not to the party leader, as in Israel.
Something similar applies in Canada, where rights are guaranteed and the country’s (quite unique) parliamentary override ability cannot touch them. After Netanyahu invoked the supposed Canada precedent on CNN, former Canadian Justice Minister Irwin Cotler retorted that Canada’s override law was created within the framework of a charter of basic rights and freedoms, which Israel lacks, and that the most fundamental rights are not subject to it. He said Israel’s plan would “eviscerate judicial review” and hand the government “undue power.”
Netanyahu says Israel’s judges “select themselves”
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Ask Questions Later to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.