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
Somalia’s South West State Says It Has Severed Ties With the Federal Government
FILE PHOTO: Somalia’s presidential candidate of South West state Abdiaziz Hassan Mohamed speaks inside the Somali Parliament house in Mogadishu, Somalia April 30, 2018. Photo: REUTERS/Feisal Omar/File Photo
Somalia’s South West state said on Tuesday it was suspending all cooperation and relations with the government in Mogadishu, the latest sign of strain in the Horn of Africa country’s fragile federal system.
At a press conference, South West officials accused the federal government of arming militias and trying to unseat the state’s president, Abdiaziz Hassan Mohamed Laftagareen. Somalia’s defense and information ministers did not respond to Reuters’ requests for comment.
Disputes over constitutional changes, elections and the balance of power between Mogadishu and regional administrations repeatedly open up political fault lines in Somalia. The South West administration says relations with Mogadishu worsened after the federal government pushed through constitutional amendments opposed by some state leaders.
Travel agencies told Reuters on Tuesday that commercial flights between Mogadishu and Baidoa, the administrative capital of South West state, had been halted. Humanitarian flights, including for United Nations operations, were continuing. Baidoa, which lies about 245 km (150 miles) northwest of Mogadishu, is a politically and militarily sensitive city because it hosts federal troops, regional security forces and international humanitarian operations in a zone affected by drought, conflict and displacement.
The Mogadishu government’s relations with other states have also been fraught. Somaliland declared independence in 1991 and has long been outside Mogadishu’s control. The administration of semi-autonomous Puntland said in March 2024 it would no longer recognize the federal government until disputed constitutional amendments were approved in a nationwide referendum.
Semi-autonomous Jubbaland suspended ties with Mogadishu in November 2024 in a dispute over regional elections.
Uncategorized
Report: Iran Sees Control of Strait of Hormuz as Victory Over US, Israel
An LPG gas tanker at anchor as traffic is down in the Strait of Hormuz, amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Shinas, Oman, March 11, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Benoit Tessier/File Photo
i24 News – Iran is showing no indication it is ready to end the war with the United States and Israel, as officials say Tehran is relying on its control over the Strait of Hormuz to increase global economic pressure and strengthen its position.
According to regional officials cited by The Washington Post, Iran is rejecting diplomatic efforts to identify an off-ramp and instead escalating attacks on neighboring countries. An Iranian diplomat said the strategy is to “make this aggression super expensive for the aggressors,” as Tehran faces sustained military pressure.
The Strait of Hormuz remains central to Iran’s calculations. The waterway carries roughly one-fifth of global fuel shipments, and its partial closure has disrupted energy markets. US President Donald Trump issued a 48-hour deadline for Iran to reopen the route, warning of further escalation if it does not comply.
Iranian officials and diplomats said the leadership views its ability to maintain pressure through the strait as a short-term success, even as infrastructure damage mounts. “They don’t feel any pressure to negotiate,” one European diplomat based in the Gulf said, adding that Iran sees its influence over oil markets as a form of leverage.
At the same time, efforts to mediate a ceasefire have so far failed. Officials from Qatar and Oman approached Iran last week, but Tehran said it would only engage if US and Israeli strikes stopped first. An Iranian diplomat said the country would not accept a “premature ceasefire” and is seeking guarantees, including compensation and commitments to prevent future attacks.
The war has already caused significant damage. The Pentagon says more than 15,000 targets have been struck across Iran, while Iranian authorities report over 1,200 civilian deaths. The conflict has also expanded regionally, with Iranian strikes targeting energy infrastructure in Gulf states following attacks on its own facilities.
Despite mounting losses, analysts say Iran’s leadership believes prolonging the conflict could shift pressure onto Washington and its allies through rising energy prices and regional instability. “We’re still on an escalatory path,” said Alan Eyre, a former US official, adding that Tehran is attempting to “up the costs” rather than move toward negotiations.
Uncategorized
Persistent Iran War, Energy Price Surge Set to Sway Wavering Stocks
Stock ticker. Photo: Ahmad Ardity/Wikimedia Commons.
A Middle East crisis that has convulsed markets should remain the focal point for Wall Street in the near term, as investors stay glued to developments in Iran and the fallout from surging energy prices.
As the US-Israeli war on Iran stretches to three weeks, an over 40% jump in oil prices is driving worries about higher inflation and stagnating economic growth.
Inflationary concerns on Friday were prompting markets to rule out any equity-friendly interest rate cuts this year, which investors previously had been counting on, with futures trading instead suggesting modest chances of hikes in 2026. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell expressed deep uncertainty at the US central bank’s meeting on Wednesday about how the crisis would factor into the economy, muddying its ability to forecast conditions ahead.
US stocks suffered sharp declines to end the week. The benchmark S&P 500 stock index posted its fourth straight weekly decline and hit a six-month low, while the Nasdaq Composite ended down nearly 10% below its October all-time high.
Middle East tensions escalated this week. Iran attacked energy facilities across the region following Israel’s strike on its gas field, while officials told Reuters on Friday that the US military is deploying thousands of Marines to the Middle East.
“This is a situation that’s so fluid,” said Chris Fasciano, chief market strategist at Commonwealth Financial Network. “We could have a resolution in the next week or it could go on for some time. And the longer it goes on, you start to think about the impacts it could have on the US economy.”
WATCHING OIL, STOCKS’ ‘ORDERLY’ REACTION
Swings in crude prices have rippled through asset classes. US crude settled around $98 a barrel on Friday, while Brent ended around $112. In addition to the attacks on energy infrastructure, traffic has stalled in the Strait of Hormuz, through which around a fifth of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas normally passes.
The 20-day correlation between the S&P 500 and US crude stood at -0.89 late on Friday, according to LSEG data, a strong inverse relationship that showed they have tended to move in opposite directions.
“If you’re a trader, you watch oil prices because I do think that that’s generally giving the leading indicator as to how the financial markets are viewing the outlook for the conflict,” said Eric Kuby, chief investment officer at North Star Investment Management Corp.
The S&P 500 energy sector, which includes shares of oil companies, has gained since crude prices began to spike in late February, but the group accounts for less than a 4% weight in the benchmark index.
The latest declines left the S&P 500 down 6.8% from its record closing high set in late January. The pullback has mostly lacked the chaotic quality of the abrupt equity slide last April following President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement that set off broad economic worries, Fasciano said.
“This has been fairly orderly, which I think is an encouraging sign,” Fasciano said. “And I think it’s because the underlying fundamentals for corporate America are still fairly robust and are offering some support.”
TREASURY YIELDS, MARKET TECHNICALS ALSO IN FOCUS
Fast-climbing Treasury yields, driven higher by the energy price spike and caution from global central banks, were looming as a risk factor for stocks. The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield was last at 4.38% on Friday, its highest level since last summer.
Keith Lerner, chief investment officer at Truist Advisory Services, said he was watching whether the 10-year Treasury yield sustainably rises above 4.3%, which could increase pressure on stocks, while he was also eyeing 4.5% as a key level.
“Rates going higher means borrowing costs are somewhat higher. And then that could actually slow the economy,” Lerner said. “At some point, if they keep going higher, then the relative attractiveness of (bond) yields becomes more attractive relative to equities.”
Stocks were also around key technical levels. The S&P 500 on Thursday closed below its 200-day moving average — a closely watched long-term trendline — for the first time since May. With another decline on Friday, the index ended at its lowest point since September and fell below November lows that strategists had also identified as worrisome levels.
Reports on manufacturing, services activity and consumer sentiment highlight a relatively light week ahead for US economic data. A major energy conference in Houston that will feature top global industry executives could draw Wall Street’s attention.
Events in Iran were likely to loom largest. In a note on Thursday morning, analysts at UBS Global Wealth Management said the latest developments were “pushing markets to price in a higher risk of prolonged conflict, deeper infrastructure damage and higher-for-longer crude prices.”
“While a less damaging outcome in the Strait of Hormuz remains possible, recent events have narrowed that path and heightened the risk of continued volatility,” the UBS analysts said.