Israel바카라s Supreme Court on Tuesday opened the first case to look at the legality of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu바카라s contentious judicial overhaul 바카라 deepening a showdown with the far-right government that has bitterly divided the nation and put the country on the brink of a constitutional crisis.
In a sign of the case바카라s significance, all 15 of Israel바카라s Supreme Court justices are hearing appeals to the law together for the first time in Israel바카라s history. A regular panel is made up of three justices, though they sometimes sit on expanded panels. The proceedings were also being live-streamed.
The law, which the Israeli parliament passed in July, cancels the court바카라s ability to strike down government decisions it deems to be 바카라unreasonable.바카라 It is the first piece of the wider plan by Netanyahu바카라s government to weaken the Supreme Court and give more power to the governing coalition.
The protesters have come largely from the country바카라s secular middle class. Leading high-tech business figures have threatened to relocate. Perhaps most dramatic, thousands of military reservists have broken with the government and declared their refusal to report for duty over the plan.
Netanyahu바카라s supporters tend to be poorer, more religious and live in West Bank settlements or outlying rural areas. Many of his supporters are working-class Mizrahi Jews, with roots in Middle Eastern countries, and have expressed hostility toward what they say is an elitist class of Ashkenazi, or European Jews.
Earlier, late on Monday, tens of thousands of Israeli protesters crowded around the Supreme Court, waving national flags and chanting against the government.
The law passed as an amendment to what in Israel is known as a 바카라Basic Law,바카라 a special piece of legislation that serves as a sort of constitution, which Israel does not have. The court has never struck down a 바카라Basic Law바카라 before but says it has the right to do so. The government says it does not.
In a statement ahead of Tuesday바카라s hearing, Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin said the court 바카라lacks all authority바카라 to review the law.
바카라It is a fatal blow to democracy and the status of the Knesset,바카라 he said, insisting that lawmakers elected by the public should have the final say over the legislation.
The petitioners asking the court to strike down the law include a handful of civil society groups advocating for human rights and good governance. A ruling is not expected on Tuesday, but the hearing could hint at the court바카라s direction.
The case is at the heart of a wider contest in Israel between fundamentally different interpretations of democracy. Netanyahu and his coalition say that as elected representatives, they have a democratic mandate to govern without being hobbled by the court, which they portray as a bastion of secular, left-leaning elite.
Opponents say that the court is the only check on majority rule in a country with such a weak system of checks and balances 바카라 just one house of parliament, a figurehead president and no firm, written constitution.
They say that without the power to review and overturn some government decisions, Netanyahu's government could appoint convicted cronies to Cabinet posts, roll back rights for women and minorities, and annex the occupied West Bank 바카라 laws that the court, with its current powers, would likely strike down.
바카라We must remember that democracies don바카라t die in one day anymore,바카라 Navot from the Israel Democracy Institute said. 바카라Democracies die slowly, step by step, law by law. And therefore we should be very careful with this kind of judicial overhaul.바카라
The political survival of Netanyahu, who returned to power late last year while on trial for corruption, depends on his hard-line, religiously conservative coalition partners, who have threatened to rebel if he forestalls the legislation.
Netanyahu has refused to say clearly whether he would respect a decision by the court to strike down the new law. Some members of his coalition, including Levin, have hinted that the government could ignore the court바카라s decision.
Legal experts warn that it could spark constitutional crisis, where citizens and the country바카라s security forces are left to decide whose orders to follow 바카라 the parliament바카라s or the court's 바카라 thrusting the country into an uncharted territory.
