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
Rights Groups Say at Least 16 Dead in Iran During Week of Protests
People walk past closed shops following protests over a plunge in the currency’s value, in the Tehran Grand Bazaar in Tehran, Iran, December 30, 2025. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
At least 16 people have been killed during a week of unrest in Iran, rights groups said on Sunday, as protests over soaring inflation spread across the country, sparking violent clashes between demonstrators and security forces.
Deaths and arrests have been reported through the week both by state media and rights groups, though the figures differ. Reuters has not been able to independently verify the numbers.
The protests are the biggest in three years. Senior figures have struck a softer tone than in some previous bouts of unrest, at a moment of vulnerability for the Islamic Republic with the economy in tatters and international pressure building.
SUPREME LEADER SAYS IRAN WILL NOT YIELD TO ENEMY
President Masoud Pezeshkian told the Interior Ministry to take a “kind and responsible” approach toward protesters, according to remarks published by state media, saying “society cannot be convinced or calmed by forceful approaches.”
That language is the most conciliatory yet adopted by Iranian authorities, who have this week acknowledged economic pain and promised dialogue even as security forces cracked down on public dissent in the streets.
US President Donald Trump has threatened to come to the protesters’ aid if they face violence, saying on Friday “we are locked and loaded and ready to go,” without specifying what actions he was considering.
That warning prompted threats of retaliation against US forces in the region from senior Iranian officials. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran “will not yield to the enemy.”
Kurdish rights group Hengaw reported that at least 17 people had been killed since the start of the protests. HRANA, a network of rights activists, said at least 16 people had been killed and 582 arrested.
Iran’s police chief Ahmad-Reza Radan told state media that security forces had been targeting protest leaders for arrest over the previous two days, saying “a big number of leaders on the virtual space have been detained.”
Police said 40 people had been arrested in the capital Tehran alone over what they called “fake posts” on protests aimed at disturbing public opinion.
The most intense clashes have been reported in western parts of Iran but there have also been protests and clashes between demonstrators and police in Tehran, in central areas, and in the southern Baluchistan province.
Late on Saturday, the governor of Qom, the conservative centre of Iran’s Shi’ite Muslim clerical establishment, said two people had been killed there in unrest, adding that one of them had died when an explosive device he made blew up prematurely.
HRANA and the state-affiliated Tasnim news agency reported that authorities had detained the administrator of online accounts urging protests.
CURRENCY LOST AROUND HALF ITS VALUE
Protests began a week ago among bazaar traders and shopkeepers before spreading to university students and then provincial cities, where some protesters have been chanting against Iran’s clerical rulers.
Iran has faced inflation above 36 percent since the start of its year in March and the rial currency has lost around half its value against the dollar, causing hardship for many people.
International sanctions over Iran’s nuclear program have been reimposed, the government has struggled to provide water and electricity across the country through the year, and global financial bodies predict a recession in 2026.
Khamenei said on Saturday that although authorities would talk to protesters, “rioters should be put in their place.”
Speaking on Sunday, Vice President Mohammadreza Aref said the government acknowledged the country faced shortcomings while warning that some people were seeking to exploit the protests.
“We expect the youth not to fall into the trap of the enemies,” Aref said in comments carried by state media.
Uncategorized
Antisemitic Graffiti Painted on the Facade of Canada Synagogue
Antisemitic graffiti on a synagogue in Winnipeg, Canada. Photo: CIJA, via i24.
i24 News – The Winnipeg police in central Canada have opened a hate crime investigation after the discovery of swastikas and antisemitic messages spray-painted on the exterior of the Shaarey Zedek synagogue, one of the city’s main Jewish congregations. The graffiti is believed to have been done during the night from Saturday to Sunday.
The acts of vandalism were discovered early in the morning. Several hateful symbols were visible on exterior parts of the building. No injuries were reported. Officers went to the scene to assess the damage and secure the premises. The police are currently reviewing surveillance footage from the area and are asking anyone with information to come forward.
The incident has drawn strong condemnation from national and local Jewish organizations. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) denounced these acts, stressing that the desecration of Jewish institutions with Nazi symbols requires a firm response from municipal and police authorities.
The Jewish Federation of Winnipeg has also condemned what it calls “pure hatred,” warning that the repeated targeting of Jewish institutions poses a serious threat to the community’s safety. It has once again encouraged citizens to promptly report any hate-related incident to enable investigators to gather the necessary evidence.
These graffiti have appeared in a context of rising antisemitic incidents across the country. Community organizations note that synagogues, schools, and Jewish centers are increasingly being targeted, particularly during times of international tension, even when they have no direct connection to those events.
Uncategorized
Oil Prices Likely to Move Higher on Venezuelan Turmoil, Ample Supply to Cap Gains
FILE PHOTO: The Guinea-flagged oil tanker MT Bandra, which is under sanctions, is partially seen alongside another vessel at El Palito terminal, near Puerto Cabello, Venezuela December 29, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Juan Carlos Hernandez/File Photo
Oil prices are likely to move higher when benchmark futures resume trading later on Sunday on concern that supply may be disrupted after the United States snatched Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from Caracas at the weekend and President Donald Trump said Washington would take control of the oil-producing nation.
There is plentiful oil supply in global markets, meaning any further disruption to Venezuela’s exports would have little immediate impact on prices, analysts said.
The US strike on Venezuela to extract the country’s president inflicted no damage on the country’s oil production and refining industry, two sources with knowledge of operations at state oil company PDVSA said at the weekend.
Since Trump imposed a blockade of sanctioned oil tankers entering or leaving Venezuelan waters and seized two cargoes last month, exports have fallen and have been completely paralysed since January 1.
That has left millions of barrels stuck on loaded tankers in Venezuelan waters and led to millions more barrels going into Venezuelan oil storage.
The OPEC member’s exports fell to around 500,000 barrels per day in December, around half of what they were in November. Most of the December exports took place before the embargo. Since then, only exports from Chevron of around 100,000 bpd have continued to leave Venezuela. The global oil major has US authorization to produce and export from Venezuela despite sanctions.
The embargo prompted PDVSA to begin cutting oil output, three sources close to the decision said on Sunday, because Venezuela is running out of storage capacity for the oil that it cannot export. PDVSA has asked some of the joint ventures that are operating in the country to cut back production, the sources said. They would need to shut down oilfields or well clusters.
Trump said on Saturday that the oil embargo on Venezuelan exports remained in full effect. If the US government loosens the embargo and allows more Venezuelan crude exports to the US Gulf, there are refiners there that previously processed the country’s oil.
The weekend’s events were unlikely to materially alter global oil markets or the global economy given the US strikes avoided Venezuela’s oil infrastructure, said Neil Shearing, group chief economist at Capital Economics.
“In any case, any short-term disruption to Venezuelan output can easily be offset by increased production elsewhere. And any medium-term recovery in Venezuelan supply would be dwarfed by shifts among the major producers,” he said in a note.
Trump also threatened on Friday to intervene in a crackdown on protests in Iran, another OPEC producer, ratcheting up geopolitical tensions. Trump on Friday said “we are locked and loaded and ready to go,” without specifying what actions he was considering against Tehran, which has seen a week of unrest as protests over soaring inflation spread across the country.
“Prices may see modest upside on heightened geopolitical tensions and disruption risks linked to Venezuela and Iran, but ample global supply should continue to cap those risks for now,” said Ole Hansen, head of commodities research at Saxo Bank.
On Sunday, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies agreed to maintain steady oil output in the first quarter, OPEC+ said in a statement. Both Venezuela and Iran are members of OPEC. Several other members of OPEC+ are also embroiled in conflict and political crises.
The producer group has put increases in production on pause for the first quarter after raising output targets by around 2.9 million barrels per day from April to December 2025, equal to almost 3% of world oil demand.
Brent and US crude futures settled lower on Friday, the first day of trading of 2026, as investors weighed oversupply concerns against geopolitical risks. Both contracts closed 2025 with their biggest annual loss since 2020 marked by wars, higher tariffs, increased OPEC+ output and sanctions on Russia, Iran and Venezuela.
VENEZUELA
“The political transition in Venezuela adds another major layer of uncertainty, with elevated risks of civil unrest and near-term supply disruptions,” said Jorge Leon, head of geopolitical analysis at consultancy Rystad Energy and a former OPEC official.
“In an environment this fragile, OPEC+ is choosing caution, preserving flexibility rather than introducing new uncertainty into an already volatile market.”
Trump said on Saturday that the US would control the country until it could make an orderly transition, but an interim government led by vice president and oil minister Delcy Rodriguez remains in control of the country’s institutions, including state energy company PDVSA, with the blessing of Venezuela’s top court.
A top Venezuelan official said on Sunday that the country’s government would stay unified behind Maduro amid deep uncertainty about what is next for the Latin American country.
Trump said that American oil companies were prepared to reenter Venezuela and invest billions of dollars to restore production there.
Venezuela is unlikely to see any meaningful boost to crude output for years even if US oil majors do invest the billions of dollars in the country that Trump has promised, analysts said.
“We continue to caution market observers that it will be a long road back for the country, given its decades-long decline under the Chávez and Maduro regimes, as well as the fact that the US regime change track record is not one of unambiguous success,” Helima Croft, RBC Capital’s head of commodities research, said in a note.