Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann is drafting a new law to curb the Supreme Court - drawing the expected ire from Knesset Members on the left, such as Ophir Pines of Labor.
Minister Friedmann wishes to block the High Court from dealing with issues having to do with politics, security, the judiciary, and the national budget, except for extraordinary cases. Only if clear evidence is brought that a decision was made illegally, or without authorization, or the like, will the Supreme Court be allowed to determine its legality.
MK Ophir Pines (Labor), as expected, had sharp words of criticism for the minister, and called upon him to stop harassing and attempting to restrict the judicial system: “The government is not above the law, and the Supreme Court is permitted to review its decisions in the framework of the checks and balances in the Israeli democracy,” Pines said.
“Friedmann’s populist attack on the Supreme Court causes irreversible damage, and brings down the public trust in the Court,” Pines said.
He made these remarks just a day after several MKs and other public figures scathingly attacked the Supreme Court for its decision to evict Jews from a house in Hevron while the case is “reviewed,” despite clear evidence that the house is theirs.
MK Uri Ariel, head of the National Union faction in the Knesset, said that the ruling is clearly discriminatory against the Hevron Jewish Community, and “the judges and [Attorney General Menachem] Mazuz and the police should not wonder why the public trust in them has dropped to the floor – for they have earned it.”
Likud MK Gilad Erdan responded similarly: "The lack of willingness by the Attorney General and the Supreme Court to consider the clear evidence regarding the legitimate acquisition of the building is very regrettable, and creates a very bad public sense of injustice. It is a sharp blow to the public trust in our legal system.”
Minister Friedmann explained that his proposed law would not have been necessary “had the Court not overstepped its bounds by taking upon itself to deal with these issues, in violation of the principle of the balance of powers. The High Court often bites into the authorities of the Knesset and government, resulting in criticism against it and its dropping prestige amidst the public.”
Friedmann provided a list of sample cases that the Supreme Court agreed to hear and issue rulings in what he said was a breach of its authority:
* Decisions by the Attorney General to indict or drop charges against public figures, including the plea bargain agreement with ex-President Moshe Katzav;
* Decisions regarding military missions and other security matters such as the route of the security barrier, the law against ‘family unification’ between Israeli-Arabs and Arabs from Palestinian Authority-controlled areas, the IDF procedure in which a local Arab is used to knock on doors of suspected terrorists' homes, and the timetable for fortification of buildings in Sderot and the western Negev;
* The decision to cut off electricity to Gaza in response to continued rocket attacks;
* Decisions regarding the establishment of the Winogad Commission and other boards of inquiry.
The government recently passed, by a one-vote majority, a resolution proposed by Friedmann to enable the Knesset to re-legislate laws deemed illegal by the Supreme Court.