War between Israel and Hamas: Killing of senior leader is a blow to Hamas, analysts say
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition said Tuesday that, for the sake of national unity with Israel at war, it plans no immediate counteraction to a Supreme Court decision halting the government’s signature campaign to rein in the court’s power , was discontinued.
Across Israel’s political divide, supporters and opponents of Netanyahu’s plan stressed the need to avoid domestic unrest as the forces try to eliminate Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu’s allies, while critical of the court’s ruling on Monday, have notably refrained from announcing any attempts to relitigate the issue.
In its muted response Tuesday to a momentous Supreme Court ruling a day earlier, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition signaled it is not planning an immediate legislative response — at least while Israel is at war in Gaza.
The judges on Monday rejected a law that Netanyahu’s coalition passed last year to limit the powers of the judiciary, part of a broader reform aimed at putting more power in the hands of the government.
There was no indication of imminent plans to put forward new legislation, and instead Netanyahu’s allies said they would prioritize national unity. After months of tumultuous street protests that exposed deep social divisions, the government had already shelved the rest of the divisive plan at the start of the war in October.
Miki Zohar, a minister from Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party, acknowledged the “pain” felt in the right-wing camp by Monday’s decision. wrote on social media: “It is our duty at this time to bite our lips, act responsibly and preserve the unity of the people.”
The law, which was annulled by an 8-7 majority in court, was an amendment to a basic law, which has quasi-constitutional status in Israel. It prohibited Supreme Court justices from using a certain legal standard to overturn government decisions and appointments.
Government supporters said the standard – reasonableness – was ill-defined and used subjectively to undermine the will of voters and elected politicians. Opponents of the government said it was an essential tool in exercising judicial review in a country that has no formal constitution. Judges are expected to use the standard only to overturn extremely unreasonable decisions.
With that controversial law off the books, says Prof. Suzie Navot, an expert in constitutional law and vice president of the Israel Democracy Institute, an independent research group, “things are now back to normal.”
For now, she said, a head-on clash between the government and the court is likely to come only “if the government or one of its ministers makes an extremely unreasonable decision.”
If the court then intervenes, she said, “we may have a constitutional problem.”
But legal experts said the far more consequential part of Monday’s Supreme Court ruling was the broader decision that, contrary to the government’s position, judges have the power to strike down basic laws if they violate fundamental principles of Jewish and democratic damage the character of the state. .
That precedent-setting part of the ruling was adopted by an overwhelming majority of twelve of the Court’s fifteen judges, while a thirteenth wavered. The majority consisted of both liberals and conservatives, which seriously undermined the government’s legal agenda.
“This is perhaps the most important ruling in the country’s history,” said Professor Navot, because it sets limits on the power of parliament and the government. At more than 740 pages in Hebrew, she added, Monday’s court ruling may also be the longest.
All fifteen judges ruled in the case, a first in the court’s history. Two of those judges – including outgoing Chief Justice Esther Hayut – retired in October and have not yet been replaced.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin, one of the key architects of the government’s judicial overhaul plan, is determined to change the method for selecting judges to give politicians more control. He has refused to convene the committee that selects new judges in its current form, delaying the process. It is unclear when that will change.
The months of protests and the Supreme Court’s ruling may have set the judicial review back “many years,” said Gayil Talshir, a political scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
For now, she said, the government has “no legitimacy to lead such legislation.” One of the key conditions that Netanyahu’s centrist rivals had to meet to join his emergency government, she noted, was suspending any subsequent steps in the judicial review for the duration of the fighting.
But ultimately, Netanyahu could abuse this week’s court ruling to gain right-wing support for the next election, Ms. Talshir said.
Netanyahu’s popularity has plummeted since Hamas’ surprise attack on Israel on October 7, which launched the war. The court’s ruling could give him a right-wing tailwind to return to power, based on the same logic as his government’s original judicial review plan. Ms Talshir said: “That the unelected judges have overruled the elected government.”