Uncategorized
Israeli democracy may not survive a ‘reform’ of its Supreme Court
(JTA) — On Dec. 29, Israel swore in Benjamin Netanyahu’s sixth government. The Likud leader became Israel’s prime minister once more, and one week later, Israel’s long-anticipated judicial counterrevolution began.
In the Knesset Wednesday, newly minted Justice Minister and Netanyahu confidant Yariv Levin unveiled a package of proposed legislation that would alter the balance of power between Israel’s legislature and its Supreme Court.
At the core of this plan is a bill to allow the Knesset to override the Supreme Court. Levin’s proposals — which almost certainly have the immediate support of a Knesset majority, regardless of Levin’s assurances that they would be subject to “thorough debate” — would pave the way for Israel’s new government to pass legislation that curtails rights and undermines the rule of law, dealing a blow to Israeli democracy.
The dire implications of this proposed judicial reform are rooted in key characteristics of the Israeli political system that set it apart from other liberal democracies. Israel has no constitution to determine the balance of power between its various branches of government. In fact, there is no separation between Israel’s executive and legislative branches, given that the government automatically controls a majority in the parliament.
Instead, it has a series of basic laws enacted piecemeal over the course of the state’s history that have a quasi-constitutional status, with the initial intention that they would eventually constitute a de jure constitution.
Through the 1980s, the Knesset passed basic laws that primarily served to define state institutions, such as the country’s legislature and electoral system, capital and military. In the 1990s, there was a paradigm shift with the passage of two basic laws that for the first time concerned individuals’ rights rather than institutions, one on Human Dignity and Liberty (1992) and the other on Freedom of Occupation (1994). These laws enshrined rights to freedom of movement, personal freedom, human dignity and others to all who reside in Israel.
Aharon Barak, the president of Israel’s Supreme Court from 1995 to 2006, argued that these laws constituted a de facto bill of rights, empowering the court to review Knesset legislation and to strike down laws that violate civil liberties, a responsibility not explicitly bestowed upon the court in the basic law pertaining to the judiciary. In 1995, the Supreme Court officially ruled that it could indeed repeal legislation that violates the country’s basic laws, heralding an era of increased judicial activism in Israel in what became known as the “judicial revolution.” The court has struck down 20 laws since, a fairly modest number compared to other democracies.
The judicial revolution of the 1990s shifted the balance of power in Israel’s political system from one of parliamentary sovereignty, in which the Knesset enjoyed ultimate power, to one in which the legislature is restricted from violating the country’s (incomplete) constitution. Israel’s Supreme Court became a check on the legislative branch in a country that lacks other checks and balances and separations of power.
As a result of these characteristics, the Supreme Court currently serves as one of the only checks on the extraordinary power of Israel’s 120-member Knesset — which is why shifting that balance of power would have such a dramatic impact on Israel’s democracy.
Levin’s proposed judicial overhaul includes several elements that would weaken the power and independence of Israel’s Supreme Court. The plan includes forbidding the Supreme Court from deliberating on and striking down basic laws themselves. It would require an unspecified “special majority” of the court to strike down legislation, raising the threshold from where it currently stands.
Levin has also called for altering the composition of the selection committee that appoints top judges to give the government, rather than legal professionals, a majority on the panel. It would allow cabinet ministers to appoint legal advisors to act on their behalf, rather than that of the justice ministry, canceling these advisors’ role as safeguards against government overreach. Should a minister enact a decision that contravenes a basic law, the ministry’s legal advisor would no longer report the violation to the attorney general, and would instead merely offer non-binding legal advice to the minister.
The pièce de résistance is, of course, the override clause that would allow the Knesset to reinstate laws struck down by the Supreme Court by 61 members of Knesset, a simple majority assuming all members are present. The sole restriction on this override would be a provision preventing the Knesset from re-legislating laws struck down unanimously, by all 15 judges, within the same Knesset term.
This plan’s obvious and most immediate result would be the effective annulment of the quasi-constitutional status of Israel’s basic laws. If the Knesset’s power to legislate is no longer bound by basic laws, these de facto constitutional amendments no longer have any teeth. There are no guardrails preventing any Knesset majority from doing as it wishes, including violating basic human rights. The Knesset could pass laws openly curtailing freedom of the press or gender equality, for example, should it choose to do so.
This counterrevolution, in effect, goes further than merely undoing what occurred in the 1990s.
Most crucially, the Knesset that would once again enjoy full parliamentary sovereignty in 2022 is not the Knesset of Israel’s first four decades. Shackling the Supreme Court is essential to the agendas of the new government’s various ultra-right and ultra-religious parties. For example, the haredi Orthodox parties are eager to re-legislate a blanket exemption to the military draft for their community, which the court struck down in 2017 on the grounds that it was discriminatory. They also have their sights on revoking recognition of non-Orthodox conversions for immigrants to Israel, undoing a court decision from 2021.
The far-right, Jewish supremacist parties of Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, meanwhile, see an opportunity to deal a decisive blow to an institution that has long served as a check on the settlement movement. They hope to tie the court’s hands in the face of oncoming legislation to retroactively legalize settlements built on private Palestinian land, which are illegal under Israeli law. But this is only the beginning: Neutering the authority of the court could pave the way for legal discrimination against Israel’s Arab minority, such as Ben-Gvir’s proposal to deport minorities who show insufficient loyalty.
The timing of Levin’s announcement Wednesday could not be more germane. The Knesset recently amended the basic law to legalize the appointment of Aryeh Deri, the Shas party leader who is serving a suspended sentence for tax fraud, as a minister in the new government. The Supreme Court convened Thursday morning to hear petitions against his appointment from those arguing that it is “unreasonable” to rehabilitate Deri given his multiple criminal convictions, a view shared by Israel’s attorney general. Levin’s proposals would bar the court from using this “reasonability” standard.
The Israeli right has long chafed at the power of the Supreme Court, which it accuses of having a left-wing bias. But a judicial overhaul like this has never enjoyed the full support of the government, nor was Netanyahu previously in favor of it. Now, with a uniformly right-wing government and Netanyahu on trial for corruption, the prime minister’s foremost interest is appeasing his political partners and securing their support for future legislation to shield him from prosecution.
In a system where the majority rules, there need to be mechanisms in place to protect the rights of minorities — political, ethnic and religious. Liberal democracy requires respect for the rule of law and human rights. Yariv Levin’s proposals to fully subordinate the Supreme Court to the Knesset will concentrate virtually unchecked power in the hands of a few individuals — government ministers and party leaders within the coalition who effectively control what the Knesset does. That those individuals were elected in free and fair elections is no guarantee that the changes they make will be democratic.
—
The post Israeli democracy may not survive a ‘reform’ of its Supreme Court appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Musée d’Orsay Opens Permanent Exhibition Space Dedicated to Nazi-Looted Artwork
Inside the Musée d’Orsay. Photo: ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect
The Musée d’Orsay in France opened a new permanent exhibition room on Tuesday dedicated to works of art that were owned by Jews and looted by the Nazis across Europe during World War II before being returned to France after the war.
The new gallery room is titled “To whom do these works belong?” and will feature rotating installations of works of art recovered after World War II also known as Musées Nationaux Récupération (National Museums Recovery) pieces. Provenance investigators and researchers are still working to identify the original owners of these MNR artworks.
“Over time, the room is intended to evolve to present to the public the discoveries resulting from this research, some of which could allow new restitutions,” said the museum. “It thus constitutes a space of memory, transparency and active research, at the heart of contemporary issues related to the history of the collections.”
Now on display in the exhibition is 13 works, including the 1879 painting “Dinner at the Ball” by Edgar Degas, according to The Times. The painting was previously owned by Fernand Ochsé, a Jewish merchant and art collector living in France who was murdered in the Auschwitz concentration camp during the Holocaust along with his wife. The painting was among thousands of artworks stolen by the Nazis or forcibly sold to Nazi occupiers in France. Also on display in the exhibit is Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s portrait “Madame Alphonse Daudet” from 1876.
The new gallery room and research done by provenance investigators is being funded with support from the nonprofit organization American Friends of Musées d’Orsay et de l’Orangerie (AFMO). According to the organization, 60,000 artworks looted by the Nazis during World War II around Europe were returned to France by 1950 and 224 of those recovered artworks are housed at the museum and in need of further provenance research to find their original owners. Fifteen MNRs kept at the Musée d’Orsay have already been returned to its rightful owners.
Over the next few years, AFMO will fund a team of art historians and researchers, led by provenance expert Dr. Ines Rotermund-Reynard, and they will focus on finding the owners of the 224 recovered artworks in the Musée d’Orsay’s collections, but also approximately 200 additional pieces acquired by the museum after 1933.
Uncategorized
California Man Pleads Guilty to Killing Jewish Pro-Israel Protester; Judge Weighs Light Sentence
Chalk drawer Elena Colombo of the Hamakom Synagogue draws a blue star around blood at the exact location on the sidewalk where Paul Kessler was attacked in Thousand Oaks, California, US, Nov. 7, 2023. Photo: Mike Blake via Reuters Connect
Prosecutors in Ventura County, California have obtained a felony conviction against a community college professor who caused the death of an elderly Jewish man he struck in the face with a megaphone during a heated argument which started at the interstice of dueling demonstrations over the Israel-Hamas war.
Loay Alnaji, 54, on Tuesday pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter and battery causing serious injury, along with a special allegation and aggravating factor that he personally used a weapon to strike pro-Israel protester, 69, according to the Ventura County District Attorney’s Office.
The killing occurred in November 2023, when pro- and anti-Israel protesters confronted each other in the city of Thousand Oaks, in the early days of the Gaza war. Prosecutors said Alnaji hit Kessler in the head with a megaphone. Kessler fell to the ground, hit his head on the pavement, and died the next day.
However, even though the charges carry a maximum of four years in prison, Alnaji faces a much lighter sentence when he appears in court on June 25 for his sentencing. Ventura County Superior Court Judge Derek Malan, who is presiding over the case, has promised to honor an agreement to limit his sentence to three years of “formal probation” and “up to” one year in jail for a guilty plea.
Following the proceedings, the Ventura County District Attorney’s office said that so light a punishment, reportedly negotiated directly between Alnaji and Malan ahead of Tuesday’s hearing, is contrary to the preferences of the prosecutorial team which fought to hold him fully accountable for the weight of the crime.
“Alnaji should be sentenced to prison for his violent behavior, and our office strongly objects to any lesser sentence,” district attorney Erik Nasarenko said. “While no amount of punishment will ever fully account for the Kessler family loss, a prison commitment underscores the severity of this crime and will deter others from committing similar acts of violence.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, Kessler sustained two impacts — the blow to his head and a second from the concrete to which he fell after being knocked down. Given the charged political climate in which the killing occurred, law enforcement officials hesitated for days to pronounce that the matter would lead to criminal charges, citing conflicting witness accounts of the altercation. At one point, Alnaji’s only interaction with the Ventura County Police Department was a traffic stop initiated while officers conducted a search of his home.
Ultimately, 10 days passed before police officers arrested him on the charges to which he pled guilty on Tuesday — and he almost evaded those when Judge Ryan Wright, the first judge presiding over the case, ruled that there was insufficient evidence to hold a trial.
Since being assigned to the Kessler case in March following the death of its former presiding judge, Malan has avoided relating Alnaji’s actions to rising antisemitic hatred in the US, downgrading the deadly encounter to a disagreement between “two old guys.”
Doing so miscarries justice, the leader of a Jewish civil rights organization told The Algemeiner on Wednesday, stressing the importance of the justice system’s responding to antisemitic violence and hate crimes with a meaningful deterrent.
“The outrageously lenient plea deal offered to Loay Alnaji is a devastating failure of justice that minimizes the death of 69-year-old Jewish man Paul Kessler and sends a chilling message about how seriously antisemitic violence,” said Liora Rez, executive director and founder of StopAntisemitism. “By intervening against the district attorney’s recommendation and dismissing this killing as merely ‘two old guys’ having a dispute, Judge Derek Malan ignored both the deadly consequences of Alnaji’s actions and the disturbing reality that someone promoting pro-Hamas propaganda helped fuel the environment that led to Kessler’s death.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
Uncategorized
Israel Prepares for Possible Return to War in Gaza as Ceasefire Talks Stall, Hamas Rejects Disarmament
Israeli soldier on guard in Gaza, February 2026. Photo: Jonathan Sacerdoti / The Algemeiner
As the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas continues to reject disarmament and further stalls progress on the US-backed Gaza ceasefire deal, Israeli officials are weighing contingency plans for a renewed military campaign should negotiations collapse entirely.
According to multiple media reports, the Israel Defense Forces believes the current negotiations are unlikely to result in either Hamas’s disarmament or the full demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, warning that the terrorist group is exploiting the diplomatic pause to rebuild its capabilities, consolidate control, and further entrench its governance in Gaza.
“Hamas is deliberately dragging its feet. It is exploiting attention on Iran and Lebanon and, in the meantime, is entrenching itself in the Gaza Strip — reasserting control over the territory, establishing governance structures, and rebuilding its military capabilities,” a military source told the Israeli news outlet Walla.
“As things stand, there are two possibilities: a US declaration that the negotiations have reached a deadlock and a return to fighting, or Washington pushing a partial, ‘perforated’ agreement on Israel that would significantly undermine our security interests and erode the operational gains achieved so far,” he continued.
As regional tensions continue to mount, Maj. Gen. Yaniv, commander of the IDF Southern Command, on Wednesday presented Israel’s political leadership with a new operational plan pushing the military to brace for a potential return to combat and initiate a wide-ranging reassessment of its ground maneuver strategy and operational approach.
For months now, the US-led Board of Peace has been conducting parallel negotiations with Israel and Hamas, attempting to tie the large-scale reconstruction of the war-torn enclave to the complete dismantling of the terror group’s weapons arsenal.
However, after continued failed attempts to reach an agreement, the Board of Peace will not hold Israel to the terms of last year’s ceasefire any longer if Hamas again rejects the proposed disarmament framework, according to a document obtained by The Times of Israel.
The board’s High Representative for Gaza Nickolay Mladenov has previously warned that Hamas’s refusal to disarm could trigger a resumption of the war. But now, the official is reportedly signaling that Israel would not be expected to halt military operations or guarantee humanitarian access to Gaza if the ceasefire framework collapses.
Hamas has consistently refused to relinquish its weapons, insisting that Israel must first fully comply with phase one of the ceasefire — including expanded humanitarian aid deliveries, full reopening of the Rafah crossing, and withdrawal of Israeli forces to the agreed Yellow Line — before any disarmament process can proceed.
For its part, Israel has warned that the Islamist group must fully disarm for the second phase of the ceasefire to move forward, pointing to tens of thousands of rifles and an active network of underground tunnels still under the terrorist group’s control.
If Hamas does not give up its weapons, Israeli officials have vowed not to withdraw troops from Gaza any further or approve any rebuilding efforts, effectively stalling the ceasefire agreement.
Under the ceasefire, the Israeli military currently controls over 50 percent of Gaza, while Hamas remains entrenched in the nearly half of Gazan territory it still controls, where the vast majority of the population lives.
In its latest counterproposal, the terrorist group said that any transfer of its weapons would only be possible as part of a wider process leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state.
As the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement remains stalled, Israeli officials have warned that Hamas is quietly exploiting the pause in fighting to tighten its control over civilian life while simultaneously rebuilding its military capabilities behind the scenes.
Last month, local elections saw the Palestinian Authority (PA) record notable gains, with results appearing strong on the surface. However, experts warn the outcome actually reinforced Hamas’s political theater, projecting an image of shifting authority while the group effectively maintains its control on the ground.
According to a report by Israel’s Channel 14, although newly elected municipal figures are formally affiliated with Fatah, the party of PA President Mahmoud Abbas, the presence of Hamas-linked representatives still signals the group’s continued political penetration at the local level.
Beyond official political appointments, Hamas-linked personnel are widely believed to remain embedded within municipal administrative structures, enabling the group to maintain effective control over day-to-day governance away from public view.
At the same time, through checkpoints, strict regulation of goods, and control over key public institutions, including hospitals, the Palestinian terrorist group has been quietly reestablishing its civilian governance structures across the war-torn enclave, with its authority still visibly enforced on the ground.
Hamas has also been reactivating internal security mechanisms to enforce day-to-day order, while conducting extensive intelligence operations aimed at identifying alleged collaborators with Israel and suppressing any opposition.
In an effort to reassert control and shore up its weakened position, the group has launched a violent internal campaign against armed militias and local gangs, targeting those it labels “lawbreakers and collaborators,” with the crackdown escalating into widespread clashes and violence as Hamas members move to seize weapons and eliminate remaining pockets of resistance.
Even after more than two years of war, the group is also rebuilding its military capabilities, including recruiting new operatives, conducting field and command-level training, restoring intelligence and surveillance networks, and reconstructing underground tunnel systems and weapons stockpiles.