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
Iran Supreme Leader Says Will Not Yield as Protests Simmer and US Threatens
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks during a meeting in Tehran, Iran January 3, 2026. Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed not to yield after US President Donald Trump threatened to come to the aid of protesters, as rights groups reported a sharp rise in arrests following days of unrest sparked by soaring inflation.
Speaking in a recorded appearance on Saturday, Khamenei said the Islamic Republic “will not yield to the enemy” and that rioters should be “put in their place.”
State-affiliated media reported three deaths on Saturday, with rights groups saying more than 10 had already died in demonstrations across Iran since Sunday as the collapsing rial currency hits an economy already undermined by sanctions.
ECONOMIC CRISIS
Videos circulating on social media, which Reuters could not immediately verify, purported to show protests in southern and western Iran. In one, marchers called on other Iranians to come onto the streets, chanting “We don’t want spectators: join us”.
Mehr and Fars news agencies, both state affiliated, reported that a security forces member and two demonstrators were killed in Malekshahi, a western town, when what they called armed protesters tried to enter a police station.
Authorities have attempted to maintain a dual approach to the unrest, saying protests over the economy are legitimate and will be met by dialogue, while meeting some demonstrations with tear gas amid violent street confrontations.
“The bazaaris were right. They are right to say they cannot do business in these conditions,” said Khamenei, referring to market traders’ concerns over the currency slide.
“We will speak with the protesters but talking to rioters is useless. Rioters should be put in their place,” he added.
Reports of violence have centered on small cities in Iran’s western provinces, where several people have been killed, according to state media and rights groups. Authorities have said two members of the security services had died and more than a dozen were injured in the unrest.
Hengaw, a Kurdish rights group, said late on Friday that it had identified 133 people arrested, an increase of 77 from the previous day.
Trump on Friday said the US was “locked and loaded and ready to go” but did not specify what action it might take against Iran, where it carried out airstrikes last summer, joining an Israeli campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear sites and military leaders.
The threat of action adds to the pressure on Iran’s leaders as they navigate one of the most difficult periods in decades, with the sanctions-hit economy shrinking and the government struggling to provide water and electricity in some regions.
Iran has suffered a succession of major strategic blows to its regional position since the start of the war in Gaza in 2023 between its ally Hamas and Israel.
Israeli strikes hammered Iran’s strongest regional partner Hezbollah. Tehran’s close ally Bashar al-Assad was ousted in Syria. The Israeli and US assault strikes on Iran set back the expensive atomic program and killed senior military leaders, revealing extensive penetration of Tehran’s upper echelons.
FLARING VIOLENCE
The protests are the biggest since mass nationwide demonstrations in late 2022 over the death in custody of Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini. This week’s demonstrations have not matched those in scale, but still represent the toughest domestic test for authorities in three years.
Rights groups such as Hengaw and activists posting on social media reported continued protests and violence by security forces across Iran, while state-affiliated media reported what it called attacks on property by infiltrators “in the name of protest.”
State television reported arrests in western and central Iran and near the capital Tehran, including of people accused of manufacturing petrol bombs and home-made pistols.
Numerous social media posts overnight said there had been unrest in a number of cities and towns, as well as three districts of Tehran.
Reuters could not immediately verify the reports by rights groups, state media or social media accounts.
Uncategorized
Trump Says US Oil Companies Will Spend Billions in Venezuela
A photograph posted by US President Donald Trump on his Truth Social account shows him sitting next to CIA Director John Ratcliffe and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio as they watch the US military operation in Venezuela, January 3, 2026. Photo: @realDonaldTrump/Handout via REUTERS
President Donald Trump said that American oil companies were prepared to enter Venezuela and invest to restore production in the South American country, an announcement that came just hours after Nicolás Maduro was captured and removed by US forces.
“We’re going to have our very large US oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country,” Trump said on Saturday.
While Chevron is the only American major with current operations in Venezuela, Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips, among others, have storied histories in the country. The American Petroleum Institute, the largest US oil trade group, said on Saturday it was monitoring the emerging situation.
“We’re closely watching developments involving Venezuela, including the potential implications for global energy markets,” an API spokesperson told Reuters.
Chevron, which exports around 150,000 bpd of crude from Venezuela to the US Gulf Coast, said it is focused on the safety and wellbeing of its employees, in addition to the integrity of its assets.
“We continue to operate in full compliance with all relevant laws and regulations,” a Chevron spokesperson said in an emailed response to questions.
Top oilfield service companies SLB, Baker Hughes, Halliburton and Weatherford did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Exxon and Conoco did not immediately respond to questions from Reuters.
Trump’s plans to have large US oil companies enter Venezuela and get “oil flowing” will be hindered by lack of infrastructure that will require many years and heavy investment, analysts said. “There are still many questions that need to be answered about the state of the Venezuelan oil industry, but it is clear that it will take tens of billions of dollars to turn that industry around,” said Peter McNally, Global Head of Sector Analysts at Third Bridge, adding that it could take at least a decade of Western oil majors committing to the country.
A US embargo on all Venezuelan oil, meanwhile, remains in full effect, Trump said. He told reporters that the US military forces would remain in position until US demands had been fully met.
“The American armada remains poised in position, and the US retains all military options until United States demands have been fully met and fully satisfied,” he said.
Uncategorized
US Captures Venezuela’s Maduro, Trump Says US Will Run the Country
Smoke rises near Fort Tiuna during a full blackout, following explosions and loud noises, after U.S. President Donald Trump said the U.S. has struck Venezuela and captured its President Nicolas Maduro, in Caracas, Venezuela, January 3, 2026. REUTERS/Leonardo Fernandez Viloria
The US attacked Venezuela and deposed its long-serving President Nicolas Maduro in an overnight operation on Saturday, President Donald Trump said, in Washington’s most direct intervention in Latin America since the 1989 invasion of Panama.
“This was one of the most stunning, effective and powerful displays of American might and competence in American history,” Trump said at a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, where he was flanked by senior officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Trump said Maduro was in custody and that American officials would take control of Venezuela.
“We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” he said. “We can’t take a chance that someone else takes over Venezuela who doesn’t have the interests of Venezuelans in mind.”
POTENTIAL POWER VACUUM
It is unclear how Trump plans to oversee Venezuela. Despite a dramatic overnight operation that knocked out electricity in part of Caracas and captured Maduro in or near one of his safe houses, US forces have no control over the country itself, and Maduro’s government appears to still be in charge.
The removal of Maduro, who led Venezuela with a heavy hand for more than 12 years, potentially opens a power vacuum in the Latin American country. Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodriguez — Maduro’s presumptive successor — is in Russia, four sources familiar with her movements said, stoking confusion about who is next in line to govern the South American country.
Russia’s foreign ministry said the report that Rodriguez is in Russia was “fake.”
Any serious destabilization in the nation of 28 million people threatens to hand Trump the type of quagmire that has marked US foreign policy for much of the 21st century, including the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq – which were also premised on regime change.
The US has not made such a direct intervention in its backyard region since the invasion of Panama 37 years ago to depose military leader Manuel Noriega over allegations that he led a drug-running operation. The United States has leveled similar charges against Maduro, accusing him of running a “narco-state” and rigging the 2024 election.
Maduro, a 63-year-old former bus driver handpicked by the dying Hugo Chavez to succeed him in 2013, has denied those claims and said Washington was intent on taking control of his nation’s oil reserves, the largest in the world.
VENEZUELAN OFFICIALS DECRY U.S. ACTION
The streets of Venezuela appeared calm as the sun rose. Soldiers patrolled some parts and some small pro-Maduro crowds began gathering in Caracas.
Others, however, expressed relief.
“I’m happy, I doubted for a moment that it was happening because it’s like a movie,” said merchant Carolina Pimentel, 37, in the city of Maracay. “It’s all calm now but I feel like at any moment everyone will be out celebrating.”
Venezuelan officials condemned Saturday’s intervention. “In the unity of the people we will find the strength to resist and to triumph,” Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino said in a video message.
While various Latin American governments oppose Maduro and say he stole the 2024 vote, direct US action revives painful memories of past interventions and is generally strongly opposed by governments and populations in the region.
Trump’s action recalls the Monroe Doctrine, laid out in 1823 by President James Monroe, laying US claim to influence in the region, as well as the “gunboat diplomacy” seen under Theodore Roosevelt in the early 1900s.
Venezuelan allies Russia, Cuba and Iran were quick to condemn the strikes as a violation of sovereignty. Tehran urged the UN Security Council to stop the “unlawful aggression.”
Among major Latin American nations, Argentina’s President Javier Milei lauded Venezuela’s new “freedom” while Mexico condemned the intervention and Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said it crossed “an unacceptable line.”