Before writing this column, I tried to find out when was the first time an Israeli court repealed a law enacted by the Knesset.
Opinions are divided, but the first clear case for this phenomenon is probably the "Deri-Pinhasi rule" of 1992, in which the Supreme Court ordered the then Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, to fire Minister Deri and Deputy Minister Pinchasi who were charged with crimes, without any legal reason. .
The Supreme Court judges relied in their rulings on the "cause of reasonableness," or as it is translated into spoken Hebrew: that is how it seems to us.
Since many cases and precedents have passed, we have all become accustomed to a situation where the final and primary legislative body is the court and not the Knesset.
Hundreds of cases in which High Court judges make Israeli law their own, using grounds such as "reasonable" and "substantial" to formulate unfounded judgments that ridicule and disparage any democratic process.
Calls to rectify the situation can be heard from all sides.
There are those who call for "reform of the judicial system", others support the enactment of laws "bypassing the High Court" of various kinds, and there are those who find a cure for changing the process of electing judges. All these are good and beautiful, but I do not understand why
When Supreme Court justices come and rule, in complete disregard of a properly enacted state law, they do not consult.
They do not hang on to the laws of "bypassing the Knesset" or calling for reforms in legislation.
They do not ask, do not offer, and most importantly - do not hesitate.
They decide.
The shorthand has finished writing in the protocol, the hammer lands on the anvil, congratulations, we have a precedent.
In anticipation of the right's return to power, I suggest that its leaders examine their selection of tools and attach a new tool to it.
Forgiveness, whoever considers himself a right-wing political leader should be equipped with the following sentence:
"I have read carefully the court's decision. As I understand it, this decision is illegal, unconstitutional and was made against the will of the voter. Therefore, I do not see myself as committed to it and do not intend to obey it."
To some extent I am sorry for my recommendation, because it moves very close, too close, to anarchy;
This is the ultimate monster that has the power to destroy everything.
But there is no choice;
It is the judges of the Supreme Court, not the politicians, who have paved the dangerous path that curves to the edge of the cliff of anarchy.
Those who relied on statehood while despising it, those who rudely trampled the border fence are the court officials, not the government ministers.
A system that boasts of moral boundaries will not be able to successfully face an opponent who does not have such.
What I am proposing is neither extreme nor more serious than the way in which the Supreme Court ignores the Knesset of Israel.
It will not be easy, and it certainly requires courage, but I do not think it is a task of authority for right-wing leaders.
Rather, it is a moral obligation.
The State of Israel is swaying when drunk on the dangerous path I mentioned.
Those who are elected to rule the country in the next election cannot afford to look the other way.
Slowly and carefully one must approach the edge of the abyss and return the State of Israel to safe ground.
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us
