Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not given up on his ambition to reform the Israeli judicial system. This issue has triggered deep social discontent and massive protests. The most controversial points of the bill aim to revert some powers of the Supreme Court, and would give the government more control over appointments to that and other courts.
“This week we will begin to take the practical steps. We will do it in a measured, responsible way, but in accordance with the mandate we received to introduce corrections in the judicial system,” Netanyahu said at a cabinet meeting. The statements came after the opposition abandoned the negotiations that were seeking a consensus on that measure.
“Last week Gantz and Lapid showed that they were playing games, it was a farce of fake talks. We gave them a month, and another month…their intention was to waste time and fade any amendments, while most of the public now realizes of the need to make changes in the legal system,” said the Israeli prime minister.
Meanwhile, the proposed legislation has triggered repeated protests without precedent: they denounce an attempt to undermine the nation’s democracy and impose a “dictatorship”. Netanyahu’s critics point out that the prime minister’s push to make changes to the judicial system comes hand in hand with a trial in which he is accused of corruption. Charges that he rejects on the grounds that the left and the media leverage falsehoods and pay in lawfare.
Accused
On Monday and Tuesday, opposition leader Yair Lapid testified in the criminal trial against the prime minister. Lapid was a witness for the prosecution where Netanyahu is accused of violating the public’s trust by supporting a tax reform that benefited his old friend, Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan. Lapid, who served as Finance Minister under Netanyahu, exposed the corruption of the case. But he himself was a participant, and now he denounces to save his position, in a declared internal that the ruling party questions.
This position was reinforced in Netanyahu’s favor by testimony at the trial of former left-wing political strategist Eldad Yaniv, who said he began his campaign of protests against the prime minister at the behest of police investigators. The current attorney general, Gali Baharav Miara, is right at the forefront of the current campaign against the judicial reform that the prime minister is proposing, along with the Supreme Court judges.
And of course, opposition leaders have a vested interest: Benny Gantz seeks to undermine his rival and cover his own causes of corruption at the same time: Fifth Dimension, his company, is suspected of corrupt business practices and security breaches. , among other things, for his alleged attempt to sell spyware to Qatar.
Lawfare
Netanyahu’s insistence on impeaching former president and current Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump is similarly the product of a politicized justice system. The charges filed against the former US president describe actions identical to those carried out by other former presidents (he had declassified documents in his possession). But while Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and others have been treated with deference, Trump is being singled out as a traitor and a threat to national security.
Thus, both in the United States and in Israel, many citizens denounce the criminalization of those who seek political reforms. Lawfare is the flag again. Trumpists insist that Russian collusion in local elections is a hoax, that it was invented by the Democratic Party in collaboration with the FBI and the Department of Justice, and that it would never have caught on without the mobilization of the media.
In line, Netanyahu’s supporters have expressed anger and frustration with the political class and media whom they accuse of falsely fighting for “democracy” when in reality they seek to overthrow an elected government and block Netanyahu’s ability to govern through demonization.
Reform
The lawfare and the counter arguments of those who seek judicial reform correspond to those of, for example, Cristina Kirchner and her entourage in Argentina. In Israel, the text proposed by Natanyahu is issued on three main fronts: the modification of the judge selection committee; an annulment clause so that Parliament can promulgate laws today challenged by the Court; and a modification so that the court cannot disqualify senior government officials.
The current committee for the selection of judges, a kind of Council of the Magistracy, is now in the orbit of the Court and the bar association. With the reform, it would become more dependent on the Executive. Second, the Court could not invalidate so-called “fundamental” laws and could only uphold regular laws.
And finally, the Supreme Court would be prevented from disqualifying ministers, judging or debating a prime minister’s fitness motions. Therefore, critics of the reform point out that the changes attempt to weaken the authority of the judiciary and give greater power to politicians. A path to impunity.
Image gallery
