Government presents softened judicial reform plan

The proposal seeks reforms to the way judges are appointed and Basic Laws function.

By JNS

Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar presented a pared-down judicial reform proposal on Thursday, reaction to which generally adhered to party lines.

Their proposal addresses two issues: 1) the way judges are selected, and 2) Basic Laws, which are quasi-constitutional in nature. The proposal would not go into effect until after a national election is held.

Coalition members generally praised the Sa’ar-Levin initiative. By finding agreement with Sa’ar, who brought four additional Knesset seats into the coalition when he joined the government in September, Levin sought to assure the deal would have full coalition support—68 Knesset seats out of 120.

MK Boaz Bismuth of the Likud Party said, “I congratulate Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar on the draft proposal they presented, which brings true good news to the people of Israel.”

“This is an important step toward strengthening the Israeli state and society in the midst of a period of war, when the unity of the people is the key to victory.”

“Even a journey of a thousand miles begins with a small step,” tweeted Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich of the Religious Zionism Party.

“I welcome any progress that will repair and rebuild public trust in the justice system, even if it is a first step. Broad national consensus is important for the unity and strength of the people and justifies compromises,” he said.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir of the Otzma Yehudit Party echoed the sentiment, saying, “Reform with broad consensus is the right compromise, even when it is not perfect, and therefore I support the draft proposal and the change is welcome.”

Opposition parties, on the other hand, expressed disapproval.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid of the Yesh Atid Party dismissed the plan, tweeting, “I will respond to Yariv Levin immediately after he complies with the court order and appoints a president of the High Court of Justice by January 16.”

Lapid referred to the court’s order that Levin convene the Judicial Selection Committee and enable it to appoint a president of the Supreme Court. Levin had held up the convening of the committee as he opposed the candidacy of the acting court president, Justice Isaac Amit, who is known for his judicial activism. (As part of the compromise proposal, Levin will remove his opposition to Amit.)

Yisrael Beytenu Party head MK Avigdor Liberman treated the outline as at best a partial fix. “The only solution to the constitutional crisis is the establishment of a constitution for the State of Israel. Everything else is just patch upon patch.”

Yair Golan, chairman of the far-left The Democrats, a merger of the Meretz and Labor parties, said his party would not discuss or agree to any proposal until all legislation put forward by the coalition is halted, “including the attempt to take over the media, the Bar Association, the dismissal of the attorney general, the subordination of the DIP [Department of Internal Police Investigations] to the minister of justice, etc.”

The head of the Israel Bar Association, Amit Becher, sharply criticized the deal, calling it a “deceptive and dangerous proposal for the implementation of the principles of the coup d’état, the main one of which is politicizing the election of Supreme Court justices and increasing the government’s power over the judiciary.”

The proposal’s main innovation is to replace the two representatives of the Israel Bar Association on the nine-member Judicial Selection Committee with two attorneys selected by the Knesset—one by the opposition and one by the coalition.

Following media inquiries, the judiciary said it could not comment “for obvious reasons.”

At least one exception to the opposition’s rejection was MK Matan Kahana, a member of Benny Gantz’s National Unity Party, who declared his willingness to support the agreement.

“If this is the deal, it does seem like a good proposal around which a broad consensus can be formed,” Kahana said. “All this on the condition that the minister of justice upholds the High Court’s ruling and appoints a permanent president before next Thursday.”

The deal seeks to end the Supreme Court’s control over the selection of judges, one of the main planks of judicial reform, which was derailed by year-long protests in 2023.

In the current framework, the Judicial Selection Committee is made up of three Supreme Court judges, two government ministers, two Knesset members and two lawyers from the Israel Bar Association.

As seven of the nine members are needed to approve a candidate, and the three judges vote as a bloc, they have veto power over nominees.

Given that the Bar Association lawyers typically vote with the judges (because they don’t want to anger the judges who will hear their cases, critics say), the judges also end up with a majority.

Supporters of judicial reform argue that the judges’ majority leads to homogeneity—judges who think alike.

In addition, the proposal will establish principles for Basic Laws, determining how they are enacted and what topics they can cover, including issues related to national identity and human rights.

The proposal also limits judicial review of Basic Laws, requiring a special majority of Supreme Court judges to override them, and includes the passing of a new Basic Law enshrining civil rights in criminal procedures.

Gideon SaarJudicial reformnetanyahu governmentYariv Levin