Not so long ago, we heard claims that the Netanyahu era had come to an end, yet here we are, with Benjamin Netanyahu back in power and his newly minted Justice Minister Yariv Levin claiming that it is actually former High Court President Aharon Barak's era that has come to an end.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Levin has set out to reform the judiciary and with the help of the Kohelet Policy Forum's Aviad Bakshi and Raphael Bitton has dissected the wall of judicial activism that prevailed in Israel over the years.
It was the late High Court President Moshe Landau who first warned Barak and his associates, saying they "lived in a beautiful court building unaware of what was happening outside."
Landau publicly opposed the courts' involvement in public disputes and desire to instill values, which he said were dangerously relevant for one Israeli sector alone.
Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg too repeatedly cautioned the judges after they struck down the exemption of the ultra-Orthodox from military service, overturned the state's handling of illegal migrants and stretched the concept of "reasonableness" – by which the court can cancel Knesset decisions – to infinity, only to later advocate for limiting it. According to Sohlberg, without proper "reasonableness," the very essence of the judiciary was at risk.
As for Levin, his proposed judicial reforms are good, perhaps even too good. Putting the administrative law aside, there aren't any significant restrictions on the government. Instead of flinching at the proposed plan, the media should take heed. Conservatism prefers evolution to revolution, and Levin's reforms promote conservative values in an activist manner.
The justice minister, who will most likely fight for reform, should consider refining it. For instance, instead of doing away with "reasonableness," he should limit it, as had been suggested by Sohlberg. He could also refrain from passing an "override clause" that would give legislators the power to reverse or strike down Supreme Court laws, and leave the judiciary with authority for particular cases. Another good thing is that Levin is not seeking to split the role of the attorney general.
Initiatives to reform the legal system must not cause the very collapse of law or affect ongoing processes, which is also good, because it would interfere with Netanyahu's current legal battles.
When Levin was asked whether Netanyahu supported his plan, he avoided giving a direct answer. Until now, Netanyahu's leadership was characterized by opposition to initiatives like this. As long as his support is unclear, there is no certainty that the reform will be implemented, and as such – ironically – the judiciary's archenemy could be the one to save it.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
