Democracy in Israel* : a dangerous breach is in progress

    In the midst of a democratic turmoil, the State of Israel and its situation show us that this political regime is definitely not a given but also that the stability of a political regime has an important influence on its international relations. 

“The abyss lies at our feet” are the words pronounced by the president of Israel, Isaac Herzog in January at the NATO’s headquarters. Since 10 weeks, the people of Israel are manifesting on the street and the protest does not seem to be weakening. The journalists started to call them "the Israeli spring" as a reference to the "Arab spring". They denounce the reform of the judiciary led by the coalition of conservative, far-right and religious parties of Benyamin Netanyahu, in power since December 2022. People are afraid that the proposals curbing the power of the supreme court will start Israel down an authoritarian path similar to that of Turkey and Hungary in recent years.

This “civil war” in the words of the President is really a cultural war that expresses itself in broad daylight and alarm among the country’s Western allies. Indeed, the reform, spearheaded by the Lukid colleague of the Prime Minister, the justice minister and the Religious Zionist MK Simcha Rothman, relates to the Supreme court and seek to override almost any of its rulings. It is well known that both men have a longstanding hatred of Israel’s supreme court, which they believe to be too powerful and as biased against the settler movement. Also, it is not lost on anyone that the measures could help Netanyahu evade prosecution in his corruption trial. 

 

The first text concerns the nomination of the members. Lawyers would be replaced by two citizens and therefore would jeopardize the independence of the institution. The second text deprive the judges from their power to invalidate the work of deputies when they amend one of the fundamental law, which lie like the Constitution of the country. However, these fundamental laws are there to ensure continuity, and that no fundamental principle is called into question by a political alliance, especially when the latter intends to reduce certain freedoms. This could for example allow some parties like the one of M. Rothman, The Religious Zionist Party, to make it impossible to dismantle settlements in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.

What is dangerous behind this reform is the attempt of the supreme court as it plays a useful checks-and-balances role as the country does not have either a formal constitution or a second legislative chamber. It is to be noted that Canada is the only other country in the world with a parliamentary override clause for supreme court decisions – and it has a constitution. Supreme court is for now a big obstacle in matters of economy, security and of the relationship between the religious and the State. The result could be a massive erosion of democratic norms and the end of the separation of power, concept theorized by the philosopher Montesquieu which meant for him that power could not be in one hand and that power had to stop power.

Now, what is leading the President to warn the government about a civil war is that his attempts to reach a compromise, called “compromise of the people” have been immediately shot down by the government of Netanyahu. In this regard, it is an pretty historical moment because it was the first time an Israeli president, with regard to its largely ceremonial role, presented himself on television in prime time to talk to the people and comment a case in progress. 

This reform is part of an extremely conservative and liberticide line of Netanyahu’s policy, which could lead to a rollback of pro-LGBTQ+ legislation, axing laws protecting women’s and minority rights.

A large collective of French artists and intellectuals did a column in the French newspaper “Le Monde”. They really wanted to underlined that this reform is not just a reform, it is really a change of political regime, the rise of an illiberal autocratic regime. What’s really interesting in their position statement is those sentences “We do not want our commitment to the existence of Israel to be used as a guarantee for an autocratic and nationalistic regime. We do not want Israel to be indefensible”. This highlights the delicate position in which Israel currently finds itself and the need for the country to find a solution to avoid isolation. Indeed, Israel, as regards to his position in the world, surrounded by enemies and to the constant threat of its existence, has to be defended and supported by some countries in order to survive. The government has to keep the democracy alive in order to continue to talk to other countries and above all not to close in on itself. Already, the presence of the Israeli finance minister in Washington in march has been contested. A crowd was gathered to scream “shame” to this political personality which embodies the religious nationalism of the Netanyahu’s government. Those protests are a distant echo of the historical protests in Israel against the reform of the Supreme court. Bezalel Smotrich's very visit to the country was questioned. The State Department considered the possibility of not granting him an official visa before giving up. This episode is showing that protests can be spread all around the world and impact relations between two countries, and this is all the more worrying in view of the good relations that have always existed between the United States and Israel and which Israel could hardly do without. 

Also, it is showing us something that we are witnessing actually in the European continent : how much democracy is a fragile regime and never really gained. 

* Inspired by the title of the essay Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville