AP / August 3, 2023
JERUSALEM – Israel’s Supreme Court heard a petition on Thursday against a law that protects Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from being removed from office over claims of a conflict of interest due to his ongoing corruption trial.
Netanyahu’s governing coalition passed a law in March that limits removing a prime minister from office to cases of medical and mental incapacitation. It would protect Netanyahu from being deemed unfit for office because of his ongoing corruption trial and claims of a conflict of interest. Critics say the law is tailor-made for Netanyahu and encourages corruption.
A few dozen people protested outside Israel’s Supreme Court in Jerusalem as judges heard the petition by the Movement for Quality Government in Israel.
“The Knesset interfered in the Israeli constitution, changing it only for one person,” Tomer Naor, chief legal officer at the organization, said outside the court.
The law that passed earlier this year would allow “Benjamin Netanyahu, who is facing charges in court today, to basically escape from review by the Supreme Court,” he added.
The law stipulates that a prime minister can only be deemed unfit to rule for health or mental reasons and that only the premier or the government can make that decision, not the attorney general.
Netanyahu is on trial for charges of fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate cases.
The hearing came as Netanyahu and his allies are trying to pass a series of judicial overhaul bills that aim to curtail the power of the Supreme Court and give the ruling coalition control over the appointment of judges. It remained unclear when the court would issue a decision in the matter.
The judicial overhaul plan has triggered months of mass protests in an increasingly divided Israel as opponents say the measures would concentrate power in the hands of the executive and erode the limited checks and balances.
Netanyahu and his allies, who took power in December after the country’s fifth election in under four years, say that these changes are necessary to curb what they see as an overly activist court made up of unelected judges.
_________
Challenge to Israeli law protecting PM from removal goes to Supreme Court
Al-Jazeera / August 3, 2023
Court considers petition against a law that protects PM Netanyahu from being removed from office while on trial on corruption charges.
Israel’s Supreme Court has heard a petition against an amendment to a Basic Law that was passed in March by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his religious-nationalist coalition government.
The hearing was held as protests continue against Netanyahu, who is on trial on corruption charges, and his government’s push to overhaul the judiciary.
The amendment that was the subject of Thursday’s hearing limits the reasons for removing a prime minister from office to physical or mental incapacitation, which benefits Netanyahu, who could have been removed from office for conflict of interest due to his pursuit of judicial changes while he is on trial.
The petitioner, Movement for Quality Government in Israel, argues that this “constituted another transition toward dictatorship” and “set a dangerous new precedent [whereby] the person possessing the premiership can change constitutional arrangements as convenient given the majority he has to hand”.
The five-hour hearing concluded without a verdict from the Supreme Court, and with the time frame for a conclusion to the case uncertain.
However, the Supreme Court President, Esther Hayut, did say that it was “clear” that the law passed in March was designed to benefit Netanyahu, The Times of Israel reported.
“[Likud] MP Moshe Saada said two days before the law was passed in its second and third readings ‘we legislated it because of Netanyahu’. You can’t get clearer than that,” Hayut said.
Supporters of Netanyahu, who won a record sixth term in December, say the petition is an example of what they call “meddling by unelected judges” in the work of a democratically elected government.
“There’s a desire here to create a judicial dictatorship,” Foreign Minister Eli Cohen told public broadcaster Kan.
Critics say the Supreme Court is the last check on the government and is needed because Israel has only its Basic Laws, not a formal constitution.
Netanyahu’s challenges
The Supreme Court will hear an even bigger case on September 12. For the first time in Israeli history, the entire 15-justice bench will convene to hear an appeal against another amendment to a Basic Law – this one curbing the Supreme Court’s own powers.
The legislation, ratified on July 24, prevents the Supreme Court from vetoing government decisions on the grounds of being “unreasonable”.
Critics of that amendment worry that it will encourage high-level corruption.
The court has never quashed a Basic Law or an amendment to one. Netanyahu has voiced hope that it will not do so now and has been hazy on whether he would abide by any such ruling.
Netanyahu’s Likud party echoed its leader’s recent remarks in a July 31 statement: “Israeli governments have always respected the law and court rulings, and the court has always respected the basic laws.
“These two foundations form the basis of the rule of law in Israel and the balance between the authorities in any democracy. Any deviation from one of these principles will gravely harm Israeli democracy, which these days is in dire need of calm, dialogue and responsibility.”
Protests ongoing
Thousands of protesters waving Israeli flags rallied on Wednesday against the legislation the Knesset approved last month, the first bill in a judicial overhaul planned by Netanyahu’s coalition.
“You have ruined the country, and we will fix it. Democracy! Democracy!” chanted demonstrators in Tel Aviv, which has become the epicentre of anti-government demonstrations since the judicial overhaul was unveiled in January.
“I’m against the government. What it’s doing is moving all the power to one authority,” protester Roei Ben Haim, 40, told the Agence France-Presse news agency.
“Once they ruin the system, it becomes important to me to take to the streets to tell them it won’t pass.”
He said amending the “reasonableness” clause in itself was not important but because “it’s the first act the government wants to cancel”, people “must show the government we’re determined in the face of any action it takes”.
SOURCE: NEWS AGENCIES
