Explained: Netanyahu Plan To Overhaul Judiciary And Why It Is Triggering Huge Protests In Israel

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on 22 January, dismissed Interior and Health Minister Aryeh Deri from the cabinet, heeding a Supreme Court ruling ordering him to do so.

On 18 January, the country's Supreme Court passed a verdict blocking the appointment of Deri because of his conviction for tax fraud.

Deri's exit is also expected to cause political tremors for Netanyahu's governing coalition, Israel's most right-wing government that draws support from ultranationalist and ultra-orthodox parties, including Deri's Shas, which is the third largest in the government.

While some Shas lawmakers threatened to bolt the fledgling coalition in the aftermath of the court ruling, it is expected to survive Deri's absence and attempt to craft legislation, that would pave the way for his swift return.

Netanyahu is now expected to appoint other Shas members to replace Deri, at least temporarily.

Deri's exit comes amid a confrontation between Netanyahu's newly elected government and the judiciary.

Netanyahu has made overhauling the country's judiciary a centrepiece of his new government's agenda.

Netanyahu appointed Yariv Levin, his close confidante and a senior member of the Likud party, as Justice Minister, to spearhead the efforts to overhaul the justice system. A former vice chairman of the Israeli Bar Association, Levin has been involved in legal reform since joining the Likud's Knesset slate in 2009.

Israel's political right wing has sought to reform the justice system for years, characterising it as an interventionist and ideologically left-leaning institution stonewalling its legislative agenda.

The political right has traditionally viewed the Supreme Court as a 'permanent opposition' of unelected judges, seeking to impose the rule of the legal establishment on the legislative and executive branches, especially when centre-left opposition is electorally defeated and weakened.

While institution tension between courts and parliament was a feature in Israel since its formation, the tenure of activist judge Aharon Barak, who served as President of the Supreme Court of Israel from 1995 to 2006, is seen by a significant section of the political and religious right, as the period when judicial overreach became the norm.

Proposed Judicial Reforms

The government also wants to curtail the powers of the Supreme Court by tightening political control over judicial appointments. The government's legal advisers, currently an independent group, are set to be replaced with political appointees. 

The government also proposes to lower the retirement of judges.

The Supreme Court of Israel consists of 15 judges appointed by the President of Israel, upon nomination by the Judicial Selection Committee. Once appointed, Judges serve until retirement at the age of 70, unless, they resign or are removed from office.

Widespread Opposition To Judicial Reforms

The plans to reform the judiciary have drawn fierce criticism from top legal officials, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, former lawmakers and thousands of Israelis who have come out repeatedly to protest the overhaul.

Critics say the move upends the country's system of checks and balances and imperils Israel's democratic fundamentals.

On Saturday (21 January), thousands of Israelis hit the streets to protest against the plans.

Some of his opponents accuse Netanyahu of deliberating pushing an aggressive approach with the judiciary, as he himself is facing charges of bribery and fraud. While proposed changes will not directly affect his own case, Netanyahu has faced criticism that he is settling scores with the judges.

Netanyahu has so far dismissed the protests as a refusal by his opponents to accept the results of the general election in November.

His critics also point out that during his earlier tenure Netanyahu often projected himself as a champion of the Supreme Court’s independence.

For someone who neither opted to take on the courts nor criticised the judges of Israel, the latest fight with judiciary could be driven by a combination of political opportunism, personal grievance and ideological composition of the new government.

(With inputs from PTI)