The Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu, as is known, proposed a judiciary reform plan leading to widespread protests in Israel for days. According to available sources including the BBC, the newly formed government proposed a reform plan that includes the granting of power to the parliament to overturn Supreme Court decisions with a simple majority vote, the control of the appointment of judges and the reduction of the independence of legal advisers. Along with opposition parties, many have been carrying out protest rallies against the proposed reform plan in several cities of Israel including Tel Aviv, the capital city of Israel, and the northern city of Haifa for several days and demanding the cancellation of the plan.
The power of judges is definitely rendered excessive and there are criticisms against the excessive power of unelected judges in many countries. Proponents pointed out that Israel’s judicial reforms are necessary to roll back three decades of excessive judicial activism and the power of judges. Given mounting criticisms of the court of being a political organ for its increasingly significant judicial reviews of the Knesset’s legislation, the plan can, positively saying, prevent the judiciary’s excessive power over the government. But it can also significantly impact Israel’s judiciary, democracy and governance negatively. The plan, as is rightly criticized by opponents, can hinder judicial independence, weaken the already limited checks and balances on Israeli governments by the court and deprive Israel’s court system of credibility.
Because of the weakened judiciary, the reform plan can help to pass any kind of laws, foster corruption among political leaders and judges, undermine democracy and bring several other negative effects by keeping political leaders above the law. Many critics have already mentioned that there is a chance of using it as a way to save political leaders from criminal trials including the ongoing criminal trial against the prime minister. Among other consequences, it can foster aggressive behaviors. This can be the case especially for Israeli settlements. This, as critics already doubted, may facilitate the government to legislate favoring the building of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank because of a lack of checks and balances by the Supreme Court.
Thus, the judicial reform plan may bring more negative impacts than positive ones. It is desired that a re-thought is given and the reasoned causes of concerns are heeded by the concerned authority so that the prevention of both the judiciary’s excessive power and the government’s misuse of power is ensured. But if the plan is, however, passed in the Knesset, the power to overturn court decisions or the override clause is desired to be given to selective laws, not to all laws, to keep the deserving checks and balances by the court system over the government’s controversial and harmful decisions, despite the appointment of legal advisors by ministers may not be uncalled-for.
Amir M Sayem
Chief Editor
Dhaka Opinion Magazine
