Following Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s decision to suspend legal reform legislation, Shas Chairman Aryeh Deri gave an interview with Shas’ HaDerech home website, criticizing the conduct of the coalition. Deri supports the Prime Minister’s decision to freeze legislation for negotiating purposes but sets a deadline for reaching an agreement. Deri states that the reason for the suspension is due to protest and international pressure. He warns that if negotiations fail, legislation will continue as planned, adding that the laws are already prepared for a second and third reading. Deri suggests entering the plenum and passing the laws with a large majority and in agreement with at least some opposition to prevent them from taking advantage of negotiations. In the interview, Deri also reveals the possibility of an outline with the President of the State with significant changes that did not come to fruition. Deri criticizes the coalition’s conduct in bringing the reform to an agenda in an unorganized approach. He underscores that changing the composition of the Committee for the Appointment of Judges is essential to appoint conservative judges within the framework of the law. Nevertheless, he emphasizes that what is more important than who the judge is, is to determine his authority and the rules of the game.
Hours after Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced the suspension of the legislation, Shas Chairman Aryeh Deri sat down for an interview with Shas’ home website, HaDerech alongside criticism of the conduct of the coalition in which he is a senior member.
He backed the Prime Minister’s position to freeze the legislation for the purpose of negotiations, but he sets a clear deadline for reaching an understanding, otherwise the legislation will continue on the planned course.
In the interview, Deri explained the rationale that led to the freezing of the legal reform legislation. He claims that this came as a result of the protests and international pressure, “They (AK protest leaders) are turning to the whole world to boycott the State of Israel, exerting tremendous pressure on foreign governments to put pressure on us, fighting against us everywhere. They tried to close the country. Their clear line was unequivocal, it is in fact a governmental coup, unequivocal. But what in South America or in other countries, a governmental coup is done with tanks in the streets, and they have perfected and managed to do it without tanks, it is even more dangerous, in terms of its meaning.”
That’s why Deri stated in an interview with Shimon Liberty and Avrom Dov Greenboim, “Whoever saw all the things had to make the right decision. What kind of hero conquers his creation. The definition that the Prime Minister said is the right one, we don’t stop, we postpone, to suspend the legislation. We go on recess , are leaving for the Passover holiday, and let’s see if their words are sincere,” while noting that if they don’t come to an understanding, “if they disrupt the negotiations, we will move forward without them.”
“Let’s not forget, the laws are already ready for a second and third reading, we don’t have to wait another month, as soon as we want we can enter the plenum and pass the laws”, says Deri. It will be much stronger and significant and unchangeable, if we make these moves with a large majority, in agreement with at least part of the opposition,” he warns lest they take advantage of the talks and “our good will and our responsibility,” so Deri says, “He will find A united, strong, cohesive and just coalition at the summer conference, which will act wisely, without mistakes, to pass all the changes step by step.”
In an interview, Deri revealed that hours before the beginning of the crisis that finally led to the freezing of the legislation, “there was a very good chance to conclude an outline with the President of the State with far-reaching changes, an outline that is not at all similar to the first outline he published, with the agreement of many senior officials, including legal ones, from all sides. No We were far from there, but we didn’t reach the finish line, Galant’s dismissal also stopped the contacts,” he hints that part of the issue was a fear of an internal rebellion in Likud. who came out publicly, I know of others who spoke to me personally and said they would not vote. I may be the only one who really knows who would vote and who would not, and I say clearly, if we were to bring the reform to a vote now, almost certainly with a very high probability, we would not have 61 fingers, And what’s more, we would also cause the coalition to disintegrate.”
Deri also does not spare an internal criticism of the conduct of the coalition behind bringing the reform to the agenda, “I say this with self-criticism and self-reflection, we did not conduct ourselves correctly. Unequivocally. We went to a nuclear war with a pop-up gun,” he notes that “we did not organize with proper information , with a correct strategy how to pass the reform, how to explain to the public exactly what the reform means and how it solves the problems. We made a mistake by presenting the entire package of the reform together, when everyone knows that it cannot be passed at once, and anyway it takes a long time to enact it section by section, and people suddenly saw all this backlog of the reform, and they pressed.”
Also about the main goal of changing the composition of the Committee for the Appointment of Judges, Deri tells HaDerech, “The issue of changing the composition of the Committee for the Appointment of Judges is just one detail, and if you ask me, then not even the most important detail, and I said that from the beginning. We are sons of Torah, Jews who trust in the Holy Torah and its laws, and we must remember that with all due respect and with all the changes, these are still courts that are not according to Torah law, and it doesn’t matter who the judges are. True, we are trying to remove from their absolute control over every issue in the country, and appoint more conservative judges, who focus within the framework of the law And not in a far-reaching activist interpretation, but don’t be tempted to think that this is the end, the day you appoint the judge, he can do whatever he wants, and we have already seen some who appointed them as so-called ‘conservative’ judges, and we see their decisions.
“That’s why I said, and I said this to my friends in the coalition, that it is more important than who the judge is, what his identity is, to determine what his authority is, to determine the rules of the game clearly, that not every judge can come and do what he wants.”