A makeup of 11 justices on the Israeli Supreme Court is hearing two petitions requesting that the court interfere and invalidate the Amendment to the Incapacitation Law. This is the second hearing on the issue after the court issued an order instructing the state to explain why it would not delay the law to the next Knesset.
The judges claimed that the law was clearly legislated for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and is, therefore, personal legislation.
The hearing opened with a confrontation between Prime Minister Netanyahu's attorney, Michael Rabello, and the justices. The attorney claimed that the court has no authority to overrule a basic law and emphasized that, in his opinion, "delaying the law's implementation is like nullifying a basic law."
Deputy Chief Justice Uzi Fogleman answered: "Sir, you can not claim that we have no authority. You need to first mention our legal positivism."
Rabello continued: "We live in a democratic county. Knesset Members don't want to live in a reality where one factor has the ability to change the rules of the game." Justice Dafna Barak-Erez replied: "All other paths are blocked."
Chief Justice Esther Hayut pointed out that there was harsh criticism of an amendment to a basic law to allow a rotation government, and Attorney Rabello responded: "There a difference between criticism and a ruling." To this, Hayut replied: "There is a difference. When you don't listen to criticism, we have to rule."