Israel Supreme Court Strikes Down Part Of Controversial Judicial Overhaul Law By 8:7 Majority
A part of the judicial overhaul law passed by Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government in July last year has been struck down by the country's top Court by an 8:7 majority. Unprecedented in ways more than one, the ruling came this Monday with majority judges agreeing to nullification of the law, which was introduced as an amendment to a Basic Law (Israeli courts, in...
A part of the judicial overhaul law passed by Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government in July last year has been struck down by the country's top Court by an 8:7 majority.
Unprecedented in ways more than one, the ruling came this Monday with majority judges agreeing to nullification of the law, which was introduced as an amendment to a Basic Law (Israeli courts, in absence of a written Constitution, decide issues on the strength of “Basic Laws”), based on the view that it would “severely damage” Israel's democracy.
Of the 15 judges constituting the Bench, 12 agreed that the court had authority to nullify a Basic Law in “extreme cases.” Out of these 12, 8 were in agreement that the case at hand fell in the category of “extreme cases”.
While the ruling government openly criticized the Supreme Court ruling, the opposition welcomed it. Being applauded as the first of its kind in Israel's history, the ruling is significant in that the Supreme Court of Israel was facing a direct challenge to its own power. It is also the first time that the court has struck down part of a “Basic Law”.
To recount briefly, the judicial overhaul law was passed in July amidst strong objections, with the opposition in fact boycotting the final Bill. The passing of the law was followed by historic nationwide protests in Israel, in course of which hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to streets and voiced concerns over the overhaul resulting in weakening of the powers of the Supreme Court, thus putting the balance amongst branches of the government at stake.
Most importantly, the law eliminated the doctrine of “reasonableness”, which is key to Israeli courts' power to interfere with/overrule government decisions and legislations (or amendments thereto). As such, it put restraints on judicial power of review.
Reportedly, it also introduced changes to the process of appointment of judges, thus threatening the independence of the judicial organ of the government.
In critics' opinion, the law was an attempt to do away with the checks and balances in place to ensure independence of the judicial branch of the government, and was likely to further corruption.