The disqualification of Aryeh Deri from a position in the government is suspect as it is a political action.
It is certain that some in the disqualifying panel ruled only according to their opinion on what is required by law.
But knowing the "flexibility" and "creativity" of others in the same composition, students of Aharon Barak's concept of subjective legal interpretation, it is permissible to assume that other political circumstances would have led them to rule differently.
President Hayut's legal concept and attack on the government open the door to suspicion.
Opponents of the legal reform hope that Deri's disqualification will bring down the government promoting it.
My heart goes out to the voters of Shas. The judicial system led by the High Court of Justice and the State Attorney's Office has been persistently persecuting their representatives for many years, and "good souls" come back and righteously explain to us that this is nothing but the result of some ingrained moral inferiority.
There is a continuous and outrageous humiliation here.
Our jurists come back and make it clear to them who the real rulers are.
Shas voters do not see judges similar to them in the High Court, and Israeli society will not be able to continue to tolerate this.
The direct amendment is giving public representatives a determining status in the appointment of judges.
The current system produces a uniform, fortified and strong squad.
This is a testing time for the Shas and its leader Deri, who are among those seeking to democratize the Israeli legal system. Apparently there is no valid escape from the disqualification of Deri's tenure in the government. This requires vigorously and responsibly promoting the legal reform, and to that end maintain the stability of the government, despite the destabilizing ruling of Beg "Z.
It is not easy to take such humiliation calmly, but Shas and its leader must, for the sake of correcting the law in Israel, grit their teeth and continue active participation in the government.
The current verdict, which amounts to a frontal attack on the government, joins and exacerbates the reaction pattern of the opposition, the heads of the judiciary and its spokespersons in the press: complete rejection of Levin's proposals, their unfounded demonization and the lack of any desire to discuss them in an intelligent manner, let alone a refusal to negotiate on them .
Faced with such a position, the government owes its voters to resolutely promote the democratization of our judicial system.
But the position of the other side, which denies without discussion, bodes ill.
It is possible that Deri's defiant disqualification provokes a radical and dangerous opposing position by the High Court of Justice, which could lead us to a chaotic and ruleless constitutional crisis. In the opinion of many, the possibility arises that the High Court will enjoy disqualifying the basic laws for the regulation of the judiciary and legislation as suggested by Levin, for example.
The majority in the Knesset, which represents the majority of the public in Israel, will see such a decision as an act of unlawful seizure of power.
The judges and their followers need to understand that the democratic will facing them is determined and rooted in our political culture.
It is possible otherwise.
It can be assumed, also based on Levin's words, that his proposals are a basis for discussion with the opposition.
After all, its voters have not lost their share in the ownership of the state, contrary to the childish statements of some at the ends of their camp.
It is appropriate to reach an understanding with them, provided that the fact that the majority of voters in the elections expressed a clear desire for fundamental change is taken into account.
One possible compromise is that as long as the restrictions on the ability to invalidate legislation and the prohibition to invalidate fundamental laws are guaranteed, the majority required to overcome the invalidation of laws will be increased.
It is also possible to consider that after the completion of a certain stage in the reform, the basic laws will be toughened, and changes will be required by a large privileged majority in the Knesset.
But discussion of such arrangements is not possible in the confrontational atmosphere and the violent language used by the opponents of the reform.
It is to be hoped that Deri's disqualification will act contrary to the hopes of the advocates of preserving the judicial system in its current elitist state.
It is hoped that she will solidify the ranks of the government and increase her determination.
At the same time, it is appropriate to open an opening for honest litigation with those who are afraid of the reform, and to do as much as possible to alleviate their fears.
The State of Israel belongs to all of us.
were we wrong
We will fix it!
If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us
