Israel Passes Judicial Reform Law Amid Protests, Criticism \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ Israel’s parliament passed a controversial judicial reform that increases government control over judge appointments. Critics say it threatens judicial independence and was pushed through during wartime distraction. The law will take effect with the next Knesset and faces legal challenges.
Israel Judicial Overhaul Vote: Quick Looks
- New law expands government control in selecting judges on Israel’s courts
- Measure shifts two key seats on the Judicial Selection Committee to political appointees
- Critics call it a power grab that endangers Israel’s system of checks and balances
- Passed by a 67-1 vote after all-night debate; opposition boycotted the final vote
- Protests reignite amid ongoing Gaza war and hostage crisis
- Supreme Court petitions already filed; implementation delayed until next Knesset
- Netanyahu defends bill as necessary reform; opposition vows repeal if returned to power
Deep Look
In a move stirring intense national and international debate, Israel’s Knesset on Thursday passed a major piece of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul, granting the government increased power in the appointment of judges, including those to the Supreme Court. The vote—67 in favor, 1 against—came after an all-night parliamentary debate and occurred as Israel remains engulfed in the ongoing war in Gaza.
What the New Law Does
The reform reshapes the Judicial Selection Committee, granting two additional seats to government- and opposition-selected lawyers, replacing positions previously held by the Israeli Bar Association. The changes tilt the nine-member committee toward political appointees, who would now control six of the nine seats, significantly weakening the judiciary’s independence.
- Four appointees would be chosen by the government
- Two appointees would be chosen by the opposition
- Three remaining seats would go to judges, including the Supreme Court president
Critically, political appointees on the committee could veto judicial nominations, which opponents say opens the door to ideologically-driven appointments that align with the ruling coalition.
The law, while passed, will not take effect until the next Knesset. Nonetheless, petitions have already been filed with Israel’s Supreme Court, challenging the measure’s legality.
Critics: Democracy at Risk
Opponents of the law argue it undermines judicial independence, threatening the last effective check on executive and legislative power in Israel’s political system.
“This has the potential to completely undermine the independence, the impartiality, the professionalism of the system,” said Amichai Cohen, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute. Cohen explained that Israel’s lack of separate executive and legislative branches—unlike in the U.S.—makes the judiciary the main democratic safeguard.
While the U.S. government features a bicameral Congress with independent oversight power, Israel’s prime minister and parliament majority work in unison, leaving the courts as the primary brake on government overreach.
The reform, Cohen warned, introduces a mechanism that could turn judge selection into partisan bargaining, allowing far-right elements of Netanyahu’s coalition to push for ideologically extreme candidates—including those involved in crafting the overhaul itself.
Supporters Say Reform Is Democratic
Justice Minister Yariv Levin, who spearheaded the bill, called it a “historic and necessary change” and argued it would open the judicial system to a wider spectrum of Israelis, including those with “different backgrounds and agendas.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently on trial for corruption, has long criticized Israel’s judiciary, media, and law enforcement as part of a “deep state” conspiracy. His allies say the courts wield too much power over elected officials, and that this law restores balance by giving democratically elected leaders more say in judicial appointments.
Protests and Political Backlash
The measure’s passage has reignited mass protests across Israel, echoing the massive demonstrations that rocked the country throughout 2023, when the judicial overhaul plan was first introduced. The protests quieted after the October 7 Hamas attack triggered the war in Gaza, but have intensified again in recent weeks amid anger over Netanyahu’s handling of the war, the hostage crisis, and his firing or sidelining of top military and political figures.
The opposition boycotted Thursday’s final vote, issuing a statement condemning the law as an effort “to make judges answerable to politicians.” They pledged to repeal the measure if they win future elections.
Legal Challenges and International Concern
Civil society groups, including the Movement for Quality of Government in Israel, immediately filed petitions to the Supreme Court, calling the law a “dramatic change to the basic structure of Israeli parliamentary democracy.” The group accused the government of exploiting wartime conditions to push through the changes.
Eliad Shraga, chairman of the group, stated that the overhaul represents a clear political agenda masked by wartime unity.
The measure comes on the heels of a January 2024 Supreme Court ruling that struck down a separate component of Netanyahu’s original plan—one that would have barred courts from overturning certain government actions. That ruling was widely viewed as a rebuke to the prime minister and temporarily stalled his efforts.
What This Means for Netanyahu’s Government
The timing of the vote appears strategically tied to the stabilization of Netanyahu’s coalition, which recently passed a budget and gained cohesion following the collapse of a brief ceasefire with Hamas. Analysts say the bill’s approval indicates that Netanyahu intends to govern with strong support from far-right factions through at least the next scheduled election in October 2026.
Those factions have pushed not only for judicial changes but also for continued military operations in Gaza, rejecting international calls for a ceasefire or negotiations.
Looking Ahead
As legal battles unfold, the new law remains a flashpoint in Israel’s ongoing identity crisis—between being a Jewish democratic state and an increasingly polarized society with growing tensions between the executive and judiciary. With courts now positioned as both a target and an arbiter, the coming months may define not only the future of Israeli governance, but its commitment to liberal democracy.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.