<p>Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pushed through a controversial bill that puts the actions of the executive beyond judicial oversight. Under its provisions, Israeli courts are barred from using the ‘reasonableness’ doctrine to review decisions made by the Israeli cabinet, government ministers, and other elected officials. It can be argued that a court's intervention in the domain of the executive could result in a subversion of the mandate of an elected government. But judicial oversight is meant for situations in which a government's policies, actions or intentions may be undemocratic or unethical.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/panorama/o-jerusalem-has-the-battle-for-israel-s-identity-been-lost-1240351.html">O Jerusalem! Has the battle for Israel’s identity been lost?</a></strong></p>.<p>Israel's higher judiciary has used the reasonableness doctrine on occasion to interpret some decisions as unethical or motivated by political interests without due regard to public interest. Weeks after Netanyahu made a deal with extreme right-wing parties to return to power last December, the court struck down his decision to appoint to his cabinet the leader of a religious party who had been convicted of tax offences, giving him two portfolios in an apparent quid pro quo for his party's support. Netanyahu himself is facing serious corruption charges and needs a judiciary he can control.</p>.<p>The bill passed by the Knesset, where Netanyahu's coalition has a majority, is only one part of a planned judicial overhaul. The planned “judicial reforms” also include draft legislation giving more power to the government in the appointment of judges. Another bill will take away the Supreme Court's power to strike down legislation passed by the Knesset by allowing the House to overturn such rulings by a simple majority. The attempt to curb the judiciary’s power must also be seen in conjunction with Netanyahu's other reported plan -- to permit the building of nearly 20,000 new housing units in the West Bank, and to give approval to unauthorised settlements in the territory. This would amount to a virtual annexation of the occupied territories, undermining the idea of a two-state solution. For a government bristling to implement these plans, a toothless judiciary would be easier to work with.</p>.<p>Parallels may be drawn with a similar executive vs judiciary battle in this country. However, what is extraordinary about Israel is the response of the people. Israel has no written Constitution, and individual rights and freedoms flow out of a set of rulings called the Basic Law, interpreted and protected by the judiciary so far. Masses of ordinary Israelis, only too aware of the potential for authoritarianism in an all-powerful majoritarian executive, have been protesting on the streets against Netanyahu's plans since January, and they have been joined over the months by influential figures in the Israeli establishment, and by reservists, who form the bulk of the Israeli Defence Forces. Their spontaneous impulse to stand up for democratic norms and rights is an inspiration across borders.</p>
<p>Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pushed through a controversial bill that puts the actions of the executive beyond judicial oversight. Under its provisions, Israeli courts are barred from using the ‘reasonableness’ doctrine to review decisions made by the Israeli cabinet, government ministers, and other elected officials. It can be argued that a court's intervention in the domain of the executive could result in a subversion of the mandate of an elected government. But judicial oversight is meant for situations in which a government's policies, actions or intentions may be undemocratic or unethical.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/panorama/o-jerusalem-has-the-battle-for-israel-s-identity-been-lost-1240351.html">O Jerusalem! Has the battle for Israel’s identity been lost?</a></strong></p>.<p>Israel's higher judiciary has used the reasonableness doctrine on occasion to interpret some decisions as unethical or motivated by political interests without due regard to public interest. Weeks after Netanyahu made a deal with extreme right-wing parties to return to power last December, the court struck down his decision to appoint to his cabinet the leader of a religious party who had been convicted of tax offences, giving him two portfolios in an apparent quid pro quo for his party's support. Netanyahu himself is facing serious corruption charges and needs a judiciary he can control.</p>.<p>The bill passed by the Knesset, where Netanyahu's coalition has a majority, is only one part of a planned judicial overhaul. The planned “judicial reforms” also include draft legislation giving more power to the government in the appointment of judges. Another bill will take away the Supreme Court's power to strike down legislation passed by the Knesset by allowing the House to overturn such rulings by a simple majority. The attempt to curb the judiciary’s power must also be seen in conjunction with Netanyahu's other reported plan -- to permit the building of nearly 20,000 new housing units in the West Bank, and to give approval to unauthorised settlements in the territory. This would amount to a virtual annexation of the occupied territories, undermining the idea of a two-state solution. For a government bristling to implement these plans, a toothless judiciary would be easier to work with.</p>.<p>Parallels may be drawn with a similar executive vs judiciary battle in this country. However, what is extraordinary about Israel is the response of the people. Israel has no written Constitution, and individual rights and freedoms flow out of a set of rulings called the Basic Law, interpreted and protected by the judiciary so far. Masses of ordinary Israelis, only too aware of the potential for authoritarianism in an all-powerful majoritarian executive, have been protesting on the streets against Netanyahu's plans since January, and they have been joined over the months by influential figures in the Israeli establishment, and by reservists, who form the bulk of the Israeli Defence Forces. Their spontaneous impulse to stand up for democratic norms and rights is an inspiration across borders.</p>