State President Yitzhak Bozhi Herzog called on the coalition this evening (Sunday) to refrain from raising the legal reform laws for the first reading in the Knesset. In a speech from the President’s House, Herzog called for talks under his auspices that would bring about the necessary changes in reform and agreement. According to him, the reform as it is poses a danger to the principles of democracy in Israel.
● Opinion: Goodbye Startup Nation? Israel risks losing control of its image in the world
● Globes poll: these are the changes the public wants to see in the justice system
● Approve a day off for employees? Everything you should know ahead of the planned strike tomorrow Questions and Answers
Herzog recently called for a temporary halt in the legislative process to exhaust the possibility of negotiations with the opposition. “We are in the midst of fateful days. In recent weeks, I have worked with all my might to lead to broad agreements. If only one side wins – we will all lose. The State of Israel will lose,” the president said at the beginning of his remarks.
“Millions of people ask for one thing – not to step into the abyss. We have long been not in a political debate but on the brink of a constitutional collapse. We are just before a collision, even a violent collision. I am asking, begging, violence of any kind is a red line that we must not cross under any circumstances “In choosing between breakup and partnership, I choose partnership,” he added.
“The elected government has the right to implement policies. The system of balances between government authorities is based on checks and balances. Reform can also be a basis for growth and welcome change. No authority must be fixed.”
In his speech, Herzog said that “the judiciary must be a home for all of Israeli society. I am very concerned, for example, that there is a lack of diversity and representation for people of Eastern origin in the Supreme Court.”
“The proposed reform did not appear out of nowhere,” Herzog claimed. “It is the result of a camp that feels that an imbalance has developed between the authorities and boundaries have been crossed over the years. This pain is real and ignoring it is a big mistake. On the other hand, the responsibility to listen and feel the pain of all sections of the people rests first and foremost on those who are in power at this time.”
“I believe that the parts of the reform in its current form raise deep concerns about their potential negative impact on the democratic foundations of the State of Israel,” Herzog noted. “There are millions of citizens here who see the reform as a real threat to Israeli democracy. They fear that those who protect the citizen from the power of the government will not give up – to ignore this is a big mistake.”
Five principles for compromise
“It is possible to reach a broad agreement that will put the citizens of Israel above any debate. It is possible,” Herzog said. The president presented his own compromise outline that includes five principles, including the enactment of basic laws: the legislation in four readings and the abolition of the High Court’s ability to invalidate basic laws. Other principles in Herzog’s compromise outline are the reduction of the reason for reasonableness, changing the composition of the committee for the appointment of judges and increasing the number of judges.
“The first, binding and most fundamental principle – as a condition for everything – is the enactment of a ‘basic law: the legislation’ – which will regulate the relationship to laws in the State of Israel, both ordinary laws and basic laws; and the relationship between the legislative authority and the judicial authority; and will bring about constitutional stability No more basic laws that pop up like mushrooms after the rain; a basic law will enter the statute book as such only after the Knesset has voted in favor of it with broad consensus, and in a process that will include four readings, under conditions that will be agreed upon in negotiations. There will be no judicial review of basic laws that are enacted in this way,” explained Herzog.
“‘Basic Law: The Legislation’ will also enshrine the authority of the Supreme Court to exercise judicial review of laws that are not basic laws, and this through the composition and majority that will be determined by consensus. On the other hand, in the ‘Basic Law: The Legislation’ the content of the legislature’s authority to overcome a judgment will be determined that invalidated a law enacted by the Knesset, and this through a majority and a procedure to be determined by negotiation and agreement.
“The second principle directly relates to the judicial burden. The citizens of Israel today pay a heavy price for the huge gap between the State of Israel and the rest of the reformed countries of the world, in everything related to the quantitative ratio between judges and citizens. In the OECD countries, the number of judges per 100,000 people is three times greater than in Israel The Israeli government, in coordination with the President of the Supreme Court, needs to solve this enormous challenge, and create already in the next budget a reform that will reduce this gap through a multi-year plan.
“The third principle relates to trust between the legal system and the citizens of Israel. Trust is a very basic value in the relationship between a citizen and any governmental authority. Every year in Israel, over 800,000 new legal proceedings are opened, and the system is not up to the burden. This harms the efficiency, quality, and trust of The citizens in the system. I call on the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court to jointly come up with a plan that will be approved by a government decision, with the aim of helping the justice system become more efficient, which will put an end to the torture of the courts and the unbearable procrastination, and above all – increase public trust. We owe it to the citizens of Israel.
“The mechanism for electing judges should be based on consensus”
“The fourth principle establishes the manner in which judges are selected in Israel. I propose here today that the composition of the committee for the selection of judges be changed immediately so that it reflects a proper and decent balance and equality between the authorities, and will not allow a built-in majority for any of the systems, both governmental and legal. The mechanism for selecting judges should be based on consensus and cooperation action, and not on endless rounds of submissions on the one hand and vetoes on the other. According to the proposal – each of the three authorities will have equal representation in the committee, in addition to public representatives appointed in coordination and agreement, and I emphasize – coordination and agreement, between the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court. The representatives of the legislative authority will be a representative of the opposition, who will be chosen by the opposition. The manner of choosing the public representatives, including their threshold conditions and the issue of the representation of lawyers in the committee – will be agreed upon through negotiations between the parties. As mentioned, none of the systems will have a built-in majority.
“The fifth and last principle deals with the reason for reasonableness. An unlimited possibility to use the reason for reasonableness, could become the infrastructure for a disproportionate entry of the judicial authority, into a distinct and designated territory of the executive and the legislative authority. There is a place for the use of the reason of reasonableness, which today is limited anyway to cases of extreme unreasonableness, while Demarcation and distinction of an elected rank and an appointed rank Knowing the positions of the parties, I believe that they can and should create a broad agreement also regarding the reason for reasonableness.
“The five principles that I have listed are the beginning of something and not the end of it. The principles that I am laying down here are the basis for the settlement. I appeal to the representatives of the governing authorities – the chairman of the Law and Justice Constitution Committee, the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court, please, from the bottom of my heart – stop the dance of the devils! for negotiations. Lower the walls. Build the bridges. It is possible and necessary to reach an agreement in a short time, based on these principles. It is possible to reach an agreement! The President’s House is fully committed to the issue and is open at all hours of the day for negotiations that will advance any cooperation arrangement you choose. From a joint meeting, through the establishment of a team Action, including a committee that will deal with the formation of agreements. Any way you choose, at any time you choose. Provided – that we move to a constructive and sustaining discourse, and abandon the deceiving, belittling and nullifying discourse.
“I appeal to the chairman of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee and appeal to the coalition, with a request not to bring the law to the first reading – in the background of bickering, polarization, conflict and controversy that is not for heaven’s sake; and to consider the principles I proposed here today as a basis for further discussions in the committee – coalition and opposition alike. Even before the first reading. The greatest challenge of all is maintaining the people of Israel as one nation. As mentioned, I am fully committed to this, and if required – I may even request to appear before the committee in a precedent-setting and exceptional manner, in order to present the proposed principles in depth. I am ready to do everything – I Sit back and say – everything! So that we can overcome this difficult dispute,” he concluded.
Ruach Gavit from senior bankers
After Herzog’s words, the chairmen and CEOs of the following banks: Hapoalim, Leumi, Mizrahi Tefahot, Discount, and International came out in a joint reading. of its economy,” they said.
In the meantime, a senior official in the coalition tells Globes that the vote in the plenum that was planned for some of the sections will not take place this week, and may be postponed once more, if the opposition and Supreme Court President Esther Hayut agree to litigation based on the outline presented by Herzog.