Natan Sharansky, one of the world's greatest fighters against the Communist regime in the Soviet Union, a prisoner of Zion who was decorated over time with the US Presidential Medal of Freedom; who served as a minister in the governments of Israel, calls on the parties to come together in order to discuss the contested legal reform.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
According to Sharansky, the language of the bills needs revisions. The author of, among others, the bestseller "The Case For Democracy" reassures that even in the case that the reform is approved as is, Israel will not cease to be a democracy. "You must not confuse the concepts," Sharansky told Israel Hayom. "A dictatorship is a place that denies rights from the citizens. This is not the case here."
A war between extremists
Sharansky, a former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have known each other for many years. Sharansky served as minister of industry and trade in Netanyahu's first government. He also served as minister of the interior, minister of construction and housing, and minister for Diaspora Affairs in the Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon governments. He resigned from his last term in 2005, in protest over the evacuation of Gush Katif as part of the Gaza Disengagement Plan.
In speaking with Israel Hayom, Sharansky shares his feelings, that extremism in Israeli society – on both sides – has reached almost previously unseen limits. "When I hear one side, it immediately makes me agree with the other," Sharansky admits.
"When I hear [the main lawmakers pushing the reform] Simcha Rothman and Yariv Levin, I immediately understand that the protesters have good reason to object; when I listen to the leaders of the protesters, I immediately go back to agree with Levin, and Rothman. This is how it is because everyone has serious reasons to address, but each side is adamantly refusing to sit down and discuss the matter with the other side."
Coalitional influence
Sharansky expresses his reservations over the manner in which the so-called override clause was brought up for discussion in the Knesset plenum, which allow the undoing of some Supreme Court decisions by the Knesset. "The current wording means that the government can say 'no' to any court decision. It doesn't work that way. In Western democracies, the court is responsible for the protection of individuals' rights."
"The government's claim that it is the one that will protect human rights is incorrect," he clarifies. "The Knesset cannot rule over the court when dealing with human rights."
Q: What about the appointment of judges?
"I really don't know of any democracy where judges have a veto on who will be appointed as a judge. The bills' proponents want the Coalition to be able to choose the judges themselves. I suggest that for now, the judges will not have a veto either, and the Coalition will also not be the one to exclusively appoint judges."
Q: Some suggest this, but the judges have blocked appointments if a candidate they do not support is brought before the committee.
"That's why I agree that change is needed, but this must not be forced by the Coalition. It could have a representative of the Opposition or some other thing. The Coalition must have an imperative influence, but it should not be ultimate. We cannot go from one extreme to the other. In general, why don't we talk about how to reach a consensus?".
"International damage to Israel"
As a long-time public figure, Sharansky is not afraid of expressing his opinion on the attempts at compromise that have been made, mainly the statement by Opposition Leader Yair Lapid, to freeze the legislative process. "One side is not right in declaring that it will not wait even one minute. This means that they want to manipulate the other side, but the other side is also saying that 'these are our conditions,' and taking action as if there were no elections."
Sharansky warns that although the legislative process is in its early stages, "there is serious damage to Israel's international standing." He notes that two of the greatest jurists who support Israel internationally, Irwin Kotler and Alan Dershowitz, have expressed reservations about the proposed reform in its current outline.
"Yesterday I heard Levin, and recently I really don't like the extreme approach he is taking. On the other hand, when he said, 'I am prepared to meet tonight with [Blue and White leader] Benny Gantz and Lapid,' they replied that they won't."
So where do we go from here?
Sharansky offers a variety of possibilities on how to pave the way to compromise. For example, the Government's consent to postpone the vote on the override clause, in exchange for Gantz and Lapid's consent not to give judges the right to veto the appointment of judges and the avoidance of a first reading.
"There are many more ideas," he adds. "Gantz's willingness to enter the Coalition in return for a slowdown of the reform is a good idea. You hear a lot of shouting, but actually, they agree on many issues. They also told me at the Kohelet Policy Forum that they are ready for changes. The moment negotiations begin, the differences will subside. The problem is that each side is delegitimizing the arguments of the other side."
What do you think of the claim that the reform intends to appoint judges who will in the future acquit Netanyahu in the cases pending against him?
"That's nonsense. It's good for propaganda and speeches at rallies. Because even if the reform passes as is – and I sincerely hope it doesn't pass in this format – then for a few years you can choose only two or three judges, out of fifteen. So symbolically it may seem like it, but practically, I don't think this is one of the considerations."
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
