ALTERNATIVE TO NETANYAHU PLAN OFFERED
Israel’s president on Wednesday unveiled a plan aimed at resolving a standoff over the future of the country’s legal system. But it remained unclear whether the offer would break the deadlock roiling the country and drawing international criticism.
President Isaac Herzog said his proposal reflects a broad cross section of Israel and suggested that Israel’s survival depends on reaching a compromise.
“Anyone who thinks that a real civil war, of human life, is a line that we will not reach has no idea,” Herzog said during a televised evening address. “The abyss,” he warned, “is within touching distance.”
There was no immediate reaction from either Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or his opposition.
Herzog, whose mostly ceremonial role is to serve as a national unifier and moral compass, unveiled the proposal after more than two months of mass protests against Netanyahu’s plan to overhaul the legal system.
Netanyahu’s plan would give his parliamentary coalition the power to overturn Supreme Court decisions and authority over all judicial appointments.
Netanyahu’s allies say the plan is needed to curb what they say are excessive powers of unelected judges. But their opponents say it would destroy the country’s system of checks and balances. They also say Netanyahu, who is on trial for corruption charges, has a conflict of interest.
Under Herzog’s proposal, parliament would not be able to overturn Supreme Court rulings. But judges would not be allowed to overturn major legislation known as “Basic Laws,” which serve as a sort of constitution. Basic Laws, however, would require a parliamentary supermajority, instead of a simple majority, to pass.
Judicial appointments would be made by a committee composed of coalition and opposition lawmakers, judges and public representatives. Appointments would require a broad consensus, and no single party would wield a veto.
While Netanyahu did not immediately comment, his Cabinet secretary, Yossi Fuchs, put out a statement on Twitter stressing that the proposal was the president’s “and not an outline agreed upon in any way by any party in the coalition.”