Originally Published: 02 JAN 24 07:48 ET
Updated: 02 JAN 24 08:56 ET
By Christian Edwards, CNN
(CNN) — Israel’s Supreme Court on Monday struck down a government plan to limit the powers of the judiciary, in an unprecedented move that could reignite fierce tensions in the country as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wages war against Hamas in Gaza.
The court ruled, by eight votes to seven, that a government amendment to the so-called reasonableness law should not stand. The bill had stripped the Supreme Court of the power to declare government decisions unreasonable, and was the first major piece of a multipronged effort to weaken the judiciary to be passed by the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, last year.
Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul had spurred months of furious protests in Israel as citizens accused his government of attempting to weaken Israel’s democracy.
The unprecedented Supreme Court ruling could cause splits in Israel’s war cabinet, made up of Netanyahu and two prominent critics of his efforts to overhaul the court, while the conflict in Gaza rages.
Here’s what we know about the ruling and its effects.
What is the reasonableness law?
The Knesset, Israel’s parliament, in July passed the reasonableness law, which stripped the Supreme Court of the power to declare government decisions unreasonable.
The standard is commonly used by courts there to determine the constitutionality or lawfulness of a given legislation, and allows judges to make sure that decisions made by public officials are “reasonable.”
The reasonableness doctrine is not unique to Israel’s judiciary. The principle is used in a number of countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia.
The standard was used this year when Netanyahu dismissed key ally Aryeh Deri from all ministerial posts, in compliance with an Israeli High Court ruling that it was unreasonable to appoint him to positions in government due to his criminal convictions and because he had said in court last year that he would retire from public life.
Netanyahu told Deri he had complied with the ruling “with a heavy heart, with great sorrow.”
The reasonableness bill was one part of a broader package of reforms to Israel’s judicial system. Other parts aimed to give the hard-right coalition government more control of the appointment of judges, and would remove independent legal advisors from government ministries.
What did the Supreme Court rule?
The court ruled that a government amendment to the reasonableness law should not stand. The court said it rejected the amendment because it would deal a “severe and unprecedented blow to the core characteristics of the State of Israel as a democratic state.”
The government bill amended one of Israel’s Basic Laws, which, in the absence of a formal constitution, act as an informal one. Until Monday’s ruling, the Supreme Court had never before struck down a Basic Law or an amendment to one.
In their ruling, 12 out of the 15 judges agreed that the court had the authority to nullify a Basic Law in “extreme cases.” Only eight of the 12 thought this was an extreme case.
Why were the reforms so controversial?
Israel was for months embroiled in a political crisis that saw hundreds of thousands of citizens take to the streets to protest against what was seen by many as a power grab by the government.
Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari, a prominent voice in the chorus of criticism, told CNN in July the reforms showed Netanyahu and his supporters “don’t understand the meaning of democracy.”
“The question is: What limits the power of the government? Democracy is based on checks and balances. But in Israel, there is just a single check on the power of the government, and that is the Supreme Court,” Harari said.
Like the British system of government, Israel doesn’t have a written constitution. Instead, it relies on 14 Basic Laws, as well as court ruling precedents that could one day become a constitution. That leaves the Supreme Court as the only check on the executive and legislative branches of government, a power that the amendment in July curtailed.
“This is not just a judicial overhaul. This is an attempt by the Israeli government to gain unlimited power – and they are saying so openly. You listen to the Netanyahu supporters and they basically say, ‘Hey, we won the elections, and that means we can do anything we want. Any restriction on our power is undemocratic.’ They don’t understand the meaning of democracy,” Harari said.
At the conclusion of a Supreme Court hearing in September, Justice Isaac Amit told lawyer Ilan Bombach, representing the Netanyahu government, that “democracy dies in a series of small steps.”
What has the reaction been?
Netanyahu’s allies criticized the court’s decision Monday. National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called the ruling “illegal,” saying it was harming Israeli forces fighting in Gaza.
“This is a dangerous, anti-democratic event – and at this time, above all, a ruling that harms Israel’s war effort against its enemies,” Ben-Gvir said.
Minister of Justice Yariv Levin, the architect of the judicial overhaul plans, called it “the opposite of the spirit of unity required these days for the success of our fighters on the front.” The Israeli prime minister’s Likud party said the ruling was “unfortunate” as it “is against the will of the people for unity, especially during wartime.”
The speaker of the Knesset, Amir Ohana, added that “a time of war is certainly not the time to establish a first precedent of its kind in the history of the country.”
But the Supreme Court was required to release its ruling by January 12, as two justices hearing the case have retired and are required by law to submit their final rulings within three months of stepping down.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid said in a post on X that the Supreme Court had his full backing as it “faithfully fulfilled its role in protecting the citizens of Israel.”
“If the Israeli government again starts the quarrel over the Supreme Court then they have learned nothing,” he said. “They didn’t learn anything on October 7, they didn’t learn anything from 87 days of war for our home.”
What might happen next?
Netanyahu’s next moves will be watched closely by all sides, with the threat of a constitutional crisis looming should he try to push ahead with the controversial change.
If Netanyahu does so, he risks reigniting opposition that last year spread to Israel’s security establishment, when thousands of Israeli army reservists – the backbone of the Israeli military – threatened to stop volunteering.
The ruling could also cause splits within Netanyahu’s war cabinet. Yoav Gallant, Israel’s defense minister, became the first member of Netanyahu’s pre-war cabinet to publicly oppose his plans in March, leading to his temporary dismissal before he was reinstated. And Benny Gantz, the leader of Israel’s opposition National Unity party and war cabinet member, led protests against the efforts earlier in the year.
After Monday’s verdict, Gantz said the court’s decision “must be respected” and urged that Israel’s focus remains on defeating Hamas.
“After the war, we will be required to regulate the relationship between the authorities and enact a basic law that will also anchor the status of the basic laws,” he said.
Whether divisions within Israel’s hastily assembled war cabinet will surface is unclear. But any attempt by Netanyahu’s government to force through the reforms despite the Supreme Court’s ruling could reignite Israel’s political crisis at a time it can ill afford.
The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Israel Supreme Court
**This image is for use with this specific article only** All 15 judges on Israel’s Supreme Court assembled to hear petitions against the “reasonableness” law in Jerusalem, September 12, 2023.
Debbie Hill/AFP/Getty Images
02 Jan 24
Israel protests
**This image is for use with this specific article only** Israel was rocked by months of protests in 2023 against Netanyahu’s controversial judicial overhaul.
Corinna Kern/Reuters
02 Jan 24
