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
Lia Koenig describes her life as an actress, from Bucharest to Tel Aviv
צװישן די יאָרן 2018 און 2024 האָט דער ישׂראלדיקער טעאַטער־פֿאָרשער ד״ר יניבֿ שמעון גאָלדבערג פֿונעם בר־אילן אוניװערסיטעט פֿאַרבראַכט לאַנגע שעהען שמועסנדיק מיט דער באַרימטער ייִדישער אַקטריסע ליאַ קעניג. פֿון דעם איז אַרױסגעװאַקסן דאָס בוך די בינע פֿון איר לעבן, װאָס איז פּובליקירט געוואָרן אױף ענגליש דורכן באָסטאָנער פֿאַרלאַג „אַקאַדעמיק סטאָדיז פּרעס“. קעניג, שרײַבט גאָלדבערג אין דער הקדמה, איז אײנע פֿון די לעצטע לעבעדיקע ייִדישע אַקטיאָרן, װאָס האָבן זיך געלערנט זײער קונסט דירעקט אין דער טעאַטער־סבֿיבֿה אין מיזרח־אײראָפּע פֿאַרן חורבן.
דאָס בוך פּרוּװט, װי װײַט עס איז מעגלעך אין דער ענגלישער איבערזעצונג, אָפּצוהיטן דעם נאַטירלעכן טאָן פֿון די שמועסן. גאָלדבערג שטעלט פֿראַגעס און קעניג ענטפֿערט אױף זײ, אָפֿט מאָל מיט לענגערע אָנאַזײַטן, װאָס ציִען נאָך זיך װײַטערדיקע פֿראַגעס.
דער לײטמאָטיװ פֿון קעניגס מאָנאָלאָגן איז די אַנטױשונג, װאָס ייִדיש האָט ניט באַקומען קײן געהעריקע אָפּשאַצונג ניט — דעמאָלט אין אײראָפּע און ניט הײַנט אין ישׂראל. „זײ האָבן ניט קײן דרך־ארץ פֿאַר ייִדישע אַקטיאָרן אין ישׂראל,“ זאָגט זי מיט אַ טאָן פֿון ביטערקייט.
דער שמועס נעמט אַרײַן פֿאַרשײדענע תּקופֿות פֿון קעניגס לעבן. זי איז געבױרן געװאָרן אין לאָדזש אין 1929. אירע עלטערן יוסף קאַמיען (שטײן) און דינה קעניג זײַנען געװען באַרימטע ייִדישע אַקטיאָרן אין פּױלן. לאה איז געװען דרײַ יאָר אַלט װען די עלטערן האָבן זיך צעשיידט און זי איז אַריבער קײן טשערנאָװיץ מיט דער מאַמען, װאָס האָט געשפּילט אינעם דאָרטיקן ייִדישן טעאַטער. דער טאַטע איז פֿאַרבליבן אין לאָדזש און איז אומגעקומען אינעם חורבן.
װען די דײַטשישע חיילות האָבן באַפֿאַלן דעם סאָװעטן־פֿאַרבאַנד אין 1941 זײַנען זײ אַנטלאָפֿן קײן אוזבעקיסטאַן. דאָרט איז די מאַמע שיִער ניט געשטאָרבן פֿון טיפֿוס. דאָס זײַנען געװען די סאַמע שװערסטע יאָרן אין קעניגס לעבן, אָבער אַזױ האָבן זײ זיך געראַטעװעט פֿונעם חורבן.
נאָך דער מלחמה האָבן די מאַמע מיט דער טאָכטער זיך באַזעצט אין בוקאַרעשט, װוּ לאה האָט אָנגעהױבן שפּילן אינעם ייִדישן טעאַטער. אירע אײַנדרוקן פֿון יענע יאָרן אין דער קאָמוניסטישער רומעניע זײַנען געמישטע. זי לױבט דעם ייִדישן טעאַטער װאָס איז געװען גוט אָרגאַניזירט און האָט באַקומען אַ סטאַבילע שטיצע מצד דער רעגירונג. דער בוקאַרעשטער ייִדישער טעאַטער האָט געהאַט אַ פּראָפֿעסיאָנעלע טרופּע און האָט געשמט װי אײנער פֿון די בעסטע טעאַטערס אינעם לאַנד.
אָבער דער קאָמוניסטישער רעזשים האָט ניט דערלױבט קײן פֿרײַהײט ניט אין קונסט און ניט אינעם פּריװאַטן לעבן. דער ייִדישער טעאַטער האָט עקזיסטירט אין אַ מין „געטאָ“ בעת אין דער אַרומיקער געזעלשאַפֿט זײַנען געװען פֿאַרשפּרײט אַנטיסעמיטישע געפֿילן. אינעם יאָר 1961 האָט זײ זיך אײַנגעגעבן עולה צו זײַן קײן מדינת־ישׂראל.
אין ישׂראל איז דער מצבֿ פֿונעם ייִדישן טעאַטער געװען גאָר אַנדערש פֿון רומעניע. אין דער ייִדישער מדינה זײַנען געװען פּריװאַטע טרופּעס, װאָס האָבן אָפֿט געשפּילט „שונד“. די מאַמע האָט שטרענג געהײסן לאהן: „הײב אָן אין העברעיִש און ערשט װען דו׳סט װערן באַקאַנט, קענסטו טאָן װאָס דו װילסט אױף ייִדיש.“
לאה קעניג האָט געשפּילט אױף דער העברעיִשער בינע מיט אַ גרױסן דערפֿאָלג העכער װי פֿופֿציק יאָר. און דאָך זאָגט זי: „איך רעד העברעיִש אָבער מײַן אמת איז אין ייִדיש.“ העברעיִש איז „ניט קײן שפּראַך פֿאַר טעאַטער.“ זי קען ניט שפּילן שלום־עליכם אױף העברעיִש אָדער אױף ענגליש: קײן שום איבערזעצונג „רירט נישט מײַן נשמה“.
ערשט פֿיר יאָר נאָך איר אָנקומען אין ישׂראל האָט זי װידער אָנגעהױבן צו שפּילן אױף ייִדיש, טײלװײַז צוליב פּרנסה. דער פּריװאַטער ייִדישער טעאַטער האָט באַצאָלט בעסער אײדער די מלוכישע „הבימה“. אין די 1960ער און 1970ער יאָרן האָט זי גאַסטראָלירט אין אײראָפּע, דרום־ און צפֿון־אַמעריקע און אין אױסטראַליע. איר מאַן הירשל (צבֿי) שטאָלפּער, דער רעזשיסער פֿון זײער טרופּע, „האָט כּסדר געבױט אַ פּראָגראַם װאָס האָט זיך אָנגעהױבן מיט נאָסטאַלגיע נאָכן נעכטן, און דערנאָך זײַנען מיר אַריבער צו די הײַנטיקע ענינים,“ דערמאָנט זיך קעניג.
די שמועסן קערן זיך װידער און װידער אַ מאָל צו לאהס טאַטע־מאַמע. זײ האָבן געהערט צו דעם דור ייִדישע אַקטיאָרן, װאָס האָבן „אײַנגעפֿלאַנצט די ליבע צום טעאַטער אינעם מיזרח־אײריפּעיִשן עולם“, האָט זי באַטאָנט. אין מדינת־ישׂראַל, להיפּוך, איז די באַציִונג צו ייִדיש אַ ביטולדיקע.
אינעם יאָר 1986 האָט קעניג באַקומען די העכסטע ישׂראלדיקע פּרעמיע „פּרס ישׂראל“ פֿאַר דער הױפּט־ראָלע אין יעקבֿ גאָרדינס דראַמע „מירעלע אפֿרת“. די קלאַסישע ייִדישע דראַמע האָט מען אױפֿגעפֿירט אױף העברעיִש בײַ „הבימה“ אין תּל־אָבֿיבֿ. דאָס איז געװען אַ מאָמענט װען קעניג האָט דערפֿילט אַז זי געהערט טאַקע באמת צו ישׂראל, כאָטש זי האָט ניט קײן מענטאַליטעט פֿון אַ ישׂראלי.
נאָך דעם דאָזיקן דערפֿאָלג האָט „הבימה“ דערלױבט צו שפּילן „מירעלע אפֿרת“ אױף ייִדיש מיט די אײגענע אַקטיאָרן. דאָס איז געװען דאָס אײנציקע מאָל װען דער טעאַטער האָט אַרײַנגענומען אַ ספּעקטאַקל אױף ייִדיש אין איר רעפּערטואַר. אָבער דעם ייִדישן נוסח האָט מען ניט געשפּילט אינעם הױפּט־זאַל, נאָר אױף דער קלענערער בינע „בית־החיל“ („דעם זעלנערס הױז“).
דער גרעסטער טײל פֿון די שמועסן אינעם בוך זײַנען געװידמעט פֿאַרשײדענע טעאַטראַלע עפּיזאָדן און ראָלעס פֿון לאה קעניג אין ישׂראל. עס זײַנען דאָ אַ סך אינטערעסאַנטע עפּיזאָדן, פּערזענלעכע פּרטים און שאַרפֿזיניקע באַמערקונגען. צום סוף פֿונעם בוך געפֿינט מען ניצלעכע צוגאָב־מאַטעריאַלן װעגן לאה קעניגס עלטערן; די רשימה פֿון אירע ראָלעס און אַ היפּשע צאָל פֿאָטאָגראַפֿיעס.
אַלץ איז זײער אַ װערטפֿולער מאַטעריאַל, אָבער צומאָל װערט דער לײענער, בפֿרט אַן ענגליש־רעדנדיקער, פֿאַרפּלאָנטערט אין די פֿילצאָליקע פּרטים װעגן פֿאַרשײדענע אױפֿפֿירונגען אױף דער ישׂראלדיקער בינע. פֿון דעסטוועגן וועט דאָס בוך זײַן ספּעציעל אינטערעסאַנט פֿאַר מומחים פֿונעם ישׂראלדיקן טעאַטער. דער אַלגעמײנער לײענער װעט זיך באַקענען מיט אַ מערקװירדיקער פֿרױ, װאָס האָט געװידמעט איר גאַנץ לעבן דער ייִדישער קונסט און איז טאַקע מצליח געווען, ניט געקוקט אױף די שװערע נסיונות און האַרבע מניעות אױף איר לעבנסגאַנג.
The post Lia Koenig describes her life as an actress, from Bucharest to Tel Aviv appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Bondi gunmen condemned ‘Zionist’ actions prior to attack and threw bombs that failed to detonate, police say
The two gunmen who opened fire on a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney, Australia last week, killing 15, recorded a manifesto video prior to the attack in which they condemned the acts of “Zionists.”
The description of the video, which was included in newly released documents from the Local Court of New South Wales on Monday, comes as one of the attackers, Naveed Akram, 24, currently faces 59 charges, including 15 counts of murder and one count of terror. His father, Sajid Akram, 50, was killed on the scene of the attack.
In the video, which was filmed in October and found on Naveed Akram’s cellphone, the pair sit in front of an Islamic State flag and four long-armed firearms and appear to recite a passage from the Quran. Later, the pair explain their motivation for the attack on Bondi beach, and condemn the acts of “Zionists,” according to the court documents.
“Police allege that the Accused and his father, S. Akram, adhere to a religiously motivated extremist ideology linked to the Islamic State,” the court documents read. “This is demonstrated by their videoed speech and use of Islamic State flags during the attack.”
During the attack, the pair also threw three pipe bombs and a “tennis ball bomb” that failed to detonate, according to the court documents. Another explosive device was also found on the trunk of their car.
The court document also alleges that the father and son had “meticulously planned” the attack for “many months,” detailing that the pair had engaged in: “Making an ISIS inspired video; Making of ISIS flags; Firearms Training; Making of pipe bombs and improvised explosive devices; Booking of accommodation as a staging post; and Transportation of firearms and ammunition for the attack.”
In October, the pair booked a house on Airbnb that was used as a “staging post” for the attacks and were also recorded conducting firearms training in a “countryside location” that police believe was in New South Wales.
On Dec. 12, two days before the attack, the pair were also seen on CCTV footage driving to Bondi beach and walking along the footbridge from where they would later shoot at the Hanukkah event.
Naveed and Sajid Akram allegedly traveled to Bondi Beach on Dec. 12 to plan for the attack on the Hanukkah event days later, according to surveillance video shared by law enforcement. (Local Court of New South Wales)
“Police allege that this is evidence of reconnaissance and planning of a terrorist act,” the court documents said.
On Monday, Naveed Akram was transferred from the hospital where he had been healing from injuries sustained during the attack to the Long Bay Correctional Complex in Malabar, a high-security prison facility.
The parliament of New South Wales was also recalled on Monday to vote on new legislation that would limit gun ownership for non-citizens and reduce the number of firearms a person can legally own to four.
Sajid Akram was an Indian national who had been living in Australia on a resident visa and owned six firearms.
The new legislation would also ban the display of terror symbols and place restrictions on protests, including giving police the power to remove face coverings during protests. The state government has also vowed to ban the popular pro-Palestinian slogan “globalize the intifada.”
“We have got a responsibility to knit together our community that comes from different races and religions and places from all over the world. We can do it in a peaceful way,” New South Wales Premier Chris Minns told reporters outside of Parliament on Monday.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was booed at a vigil on Sunday at Bondi beach for the victims of the attack, underscoring growing pressure on the Australian leader to call a Royal Commission, Australia’s highest level of inquiry, into the terror attack.
Albanese has so far dismissed calls for a Royal Commission, arguing that it would take too long, instead announcing a review of federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
“Emotions were raw and a lot of people in the community are hurting and angry, and some of that anger was directed towards me, and I understand that,” said Albanese at a press conference on Monday. “As Prime Minister, I feel the weight of responsibility for an atrocity that happened whilst I’m Prime Minister. And I’m sorry for what the Jewish community and our nation as a whole has experienced.”
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Bondi gunmen condemned ‘Zionist’ actions prior to attack and threw bombs that failed to detonate, police say appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Toronto men, including 1 linked to ISIS, charged with targeting Jewish women for assault
Three Toronto men were arrested by Canadian police on Friday for allegedly attempting kidnappings targeting Jews and women.
Waleed Khan, 26, Osman Azizov, 18, and Fahad Sadaat, 19, of Toronto each face over a dozen charges, including two counts of sexual assault with a weapon and two counts of attempted kidnapping with firearm, according to the Toronto Police Service.
Khan was also separately charged with multiple terrorism offenses, including providing property to fund ISIS and conspiring to commit murder on behalf of a terrorist group, according to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
The arrests stemmed from an investigation into two failed kidnappings allegedly perpetrated by the men several months ago. The attempted kidnappings stemmed in part from “hate-motivated extremism,” according to Toronto police, who said they found evidence in the suspects’ homes that they were “particularly targeting women and members of the Jewish community.”
The arrests were welcomed by Noah Shack, the CEO of Canada’s Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs, who warned that the recent terror attack in Sydney showed that “we are one intelligence failure away from a devastating loss of life.”
“It is alarming that multiple Islamic State-related terrorist plots have been uncovered over the past two years in Canada,” Shack said in a statement posted on X. “This goes far beyond the safety of any one group. It is a matter of national security and public safety. There is a ticking time bomb in our country that our leaders must confront before it’s too late.”
In September 2024, a Pakistani man was arrested in Quebec for plotting to kill “as many Jewish people as possible” in an attack in support of ISIS in New York City. Months earlier in July, a father and son were also arrested in Toronto for allegedly planning an ISIS-inspired attack on the local Jewish community.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Toronto men, including 1 linked to ISIS, charged with targeting Jewish women for assault appeared first on The Forward.