Illustration: Shutterstock
Dr. Shoki Segev, a member of the Israeli Forum for Law and Freedom and one of the leading conservative jurists in Israel, responds to the words of Prof. Yaniv Roznai, who serves as the vice dean at the Reichman University Faculty of Law.
As you remember, earlier we published the words of Roznai, who claimed earlier this evening that the Knesset recognized in a law from 14 years ago the authority of the High Court to invalidate laws. Now, Segev claims that Roznai is not accurate in his words.
According to Segev, the section on which Roznai wrote talks about the representation of the Knesset in the courts. In the past, prior to the legislation of the section in question, the person who represented the Knesset was the Attorney General.
Segev says that the section enacted 14 years ago basically said that when a law is challenged in court, the Knesset will have independent representation from the government – the Knesset’s legal advisor will represent it. The Law Amendment Ordeal states that the Knesset’s legal advisor is a Knesset employee.
According to Segev, because of this, there is no decision in the amendment of the law on the question of whether the court is authorized to annul laws, or within the limits of the authority of the court to annul laws.
Segev: “Mr. Yaniv is not accurate. The Knesset already recognized in 1969 (after the Bergman ruling) the power of the Supreme Court to annul laws that contradict armored clauses in fundamental laws – when it acted on the advice of Judge Landoi. The clause Yaniv is talking about is not a recognition of the constitutional revolution adopted by the House The Supreme Court is a judicial review far beyond armored clauses.”
“It’s a normal clause in a normal law that talks in general about what happens when the question of the validity of a law is on the agenda. This is not a confirmation of the constitutional revolution of 1995, but simply what happens when the question of the validity of a law is on the agenda.”
Did you find an error in the article? Does the content in the article violate copyrights that you own? Have you come across an inappropriate ad? Report to us