In a context not far from internal rifts, in parallel with the war on Gaza, which lasted without achieving its goals, the attempts of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to re-introduce the plan to restrict the Israeli judiciary reveal new dimensions of its accumulated internal crises.
Opponents of this plan, which aims to limit the power of the judiciary and enhance the dominance of the executive authority, believe that it represents a new link in a series of attempts to impose complete control over the joints of government.
Until now, experts believe that Netanyahu has not been able to fully pass the plan to restrict the judiciary, as it is still on the political discussion table in Israel, and the repeated postponements were the result of popular protests and great political pressure, in addition to internal tensions, especially in the wake of the October 7 attack. The surprise October 2023 and its subsequent security and political consequences.
The dimensions of the amendments plan are not only reflected in the Israeli interior, but also extend to affect the repressive policies towards the Palestinians. Amid this tense scene, questions arise about the extent of this plan’s impact on internal stability and the future of the ruling system in an entity that faces increasing skepticism about its moral and political legitimacy internally and externally.
Transformation of the judicial system
In January 2023, Justice Minister Yariv Levin announced a plan to restrict the judiciary. Levin, a member of Netanyahu’s Likud party, presented the plan as part of “judicial reforms” aimed, he claimed, at restoring the balance between executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
The minister justified his announcement of the plan by saying that it would put an end to what he described as the abuses carried out by the Supreme Court and its interference in legislative and executive affairs, and to strengthen the sovereignty of the Knesset (Parliament) as the elected representative of the people, and to address what he considers judicial hegemony over political decisions in Israel.
On the other hand, opponents believe that this plan comes to achieve political and personal interests, especially with the legal challenges that Netanyahu faces in corruption cases, which makes the plan a means to enhance the government’s influence and reduce any legal oversight that may hinder it.
On December 12, the Israeli Supreme Court issued a decision obligating the Minister of Justice, Yariv Levin, to hold a session of the Judge Appointment Committee to choose a new president of the Supreme Court before January 16, 2025, after Levin refrained from inviting the committee since the retirement of Judge Esther Hayut. On October 16, 2023.
In response to this decision, Levin announced on December 14 his intention to re-introduce the law changing the composition of the Judge Appointment Committee in the Knesset, with the aim of amending the mechanism for appointing judges and expanding the representation of politicians on the committee. This amendment aims to reduce the role of the Bar Association in judicial appointments, allowing the government coalition more control over the appointment of judges.
The writer and legal advisor, Saed Karajeh, believes that the judicial system has not worked as an impartial oversight body, but restricting it will increase distrust in the judiciary, and will raise doubts about the Israeli “democratic” face, both internally and internationally, as he described it.
Regarding the steps to implement the amendments, Karajeh said in his interview with Tel Aviv Tribune Net that they will begin by amending the laws and legislating new texts that limit the powers of the Supreme Court and prevent it from canceling the decisions of the government or the Knesset, and allow the government to appoint judges directly instead of relying on an independent committee.
This, in turn, according to Karaja, will make judicial appointments politicized, and will place restrictions on the judiciary’s ability to review Knesset decisions related to laws and government policies issued by Netanyahu, and this will change the administrative structure of advisors in the government.
It is noteworthy that the plan’s impact was not limited to the judicial field only, but also cast a shadow over military circles, as groups of officers and commanders of the reserve forces threatened to announce their intention to refrain from service if the plan was implemented.
The military personnel expressed their dissatisfaction with the reduction of the powers of the Supreme Court, stressing that this change may negatively affect the role of the judiciary in monitoring the army’s actions and ensuring respect for human rights, especially in military operations carried out in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The experts who spoke to Tel Aviv Tribune Net believe that these protests also carry a political connotation, as it shows the clear division between the political authority in Israel and the army, which usually seeks to stay away from politics. However, this plan will enhance political interference in military affairs, and affect… The independence of the army in making its security decisions.
Personal motives
Netanyahu has been facing several corruption cases for years, including accusations of receiving bribes, fraud, and abuse of power. Experts believe that the plan to restrict the judiciary may have a direct relationship to his attempts to reduce the legal pressure he faces.
Karaja agrees with this proposal, and says that this plan will reduce the ability of the judicial system to hold him accountable or influence his political future, which is at risk, in exchange for strengthening the right-wing alliance and ensuring the support of the religious and extreme right-wing parties by changing the laws in line with their agenda, as this works to highlight stability in the country. His government.
While political science professor Badr Al-Mady believes that Netanyahu’s efforts to turn the judiciary into a secondary matter are an attempt to overcome the corruption cases he is accused of, and to improve his image inside Israel by prolonging the trials that he knows he may lose, and he wants to convey a message to the Israelis that He has a mission too big to be neutralized by the judicial institution.
He added, “From this point, Netanyahu is playing to neutralize the Supreme Court and the judicial institution to avoid any convictions that would remove him from political life and lead to matters turning into a corrupt and thief person.”
Dismissal of the judicial advisor
It is not possible to talk about the plan to restrict the judiciary in isolation from the project to dismiss the Israeli government’s judicial advisor, Gali Beharav Meara, which is part of the controversy surrounding the relationship of the judiciary with the executive authority in Israel, as the story relates to the deep differences between the current government, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, and the judicial advisor. She is considered a defender of the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.
The position of Judicial Advisor, held by Gali Bhairav Meara, is the highest legal authority that advises the government and represents the state legally in the courts. Bhairav Mayara took positions opposing some of the government’s policies, especially judicial reforms.
Meara has on several occasions criticized government attempts to interfere in the judiciary, warned that judicial reforms could weaken democracy in Israel, and has played an important role in Netanyahu’s corruption cases, issuing decisions regarding legal proceedings against him.
Contrary to the position of the Israeli government and its president, Mayara more than once called for the formation of an official investigation committee into the failure of October 7, 2023, which angered Netanyahu and his party, who are demanding the formation of a “political” committee with limited powers.
The writer and legal expert, Saed Karaja, attributes this attack on Counselor Bhairav Mayara to the government coalition’s efforts to neutralize the legal opposition, considering that the attack on the government’s legal adviser proves that she constitutes an obstacle to their path to the desired change in power, as the counselor refused several times in the past to represent the government before The Supreme Court, in petitions filed on numerous issues, sometimes even supported the positions of the petitioners.
Karaja says that the allegation against the chancellor that she is seeking to overthrow the “right-wing government” in a deliberate manner, actually serves as a means to mobilize the coalition’s supporters against the legal institutions, and he expects that the government coalition’s attempts to dismiss her will continue in the near future, especially in light of the progress in Netanyahu’s trial sessions on corruption charges and his upcoming testimony. With the Prime Minister and his staff fearing that the legal advisor would attempt to declare Netanyahu unable to carry out his duties as Prime Minister in light of his trial.
The Palestinian issue
Experts agree that the plan promoted by the Israeli government carries with it serious repercussions on the future of the Palestinians at home. By reducing judicial oversight, the Israeli government will enjoy greater freedom to pass expansive settlement policies in the West Bank and Jerusalem, which threatens to perpetuate the occupation and deepen Palestinian suffering.
Ahmed Fahim, a political analyst specializing in Palestinian affairs, believes that Israel is no longer interested in appearing to be a democratic state that respects human rights and separates powers, especially as it is embarking on a huge expansionist settlement project that may erode more of the Palestinian national territory, specifically in the occupied West Bank.
He added in his interview with Tel Aviv Tribune Net that the restriction may give the Israeli occupation a free hand to amend legislation according to which the death penalty would be applied to Palestinian fighters and freedom fighters in Israeli occupation prisons.
Professor of Political Science, Badr Al-Mady, believes that these amendments will be used against the Palestinians, to carry out more violations, especially since the Supreme Court represented one of the legal paths that the Palestinians resorted to to object to the confiscation of their lands or the demolition of their homes, and it provided them with the minimum level of justice. As the role of the judiciary is restricted, these pathways will become less effective, deepening Palestinians’ sense of injustice and increasing their daily suffering.
In addition, it is expected to escalate repressive policies by adopting harsher measures against Palestinians without fear of review, and this includes laws restricting movement, imposing collective punishments, and expanding the use of military force in the occupied territories, Al-Majid said.
In light of the continued occupation and its oppressive practices against the Palestinian people, the Israeli internal crises may ultimately add a new tragic dimension to their bitter reality.
