The Israeli Supreme Court issued a ruling that ordered the delay of the implementation of a recusal law that would shield Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from being ordered to recuse himself from office.
The high court's decision was made after justices argued that the law was passed to personally benefit the premier. The Supreme Court also ruled that the recusal law, which is an amendment to the quasi-constitutional Basic Law: The Government that was passed back in March, will now take effect only at the beginning of the next Knesset term.
Delay of Israel's Recusal Law
The majority had ruled that the purpose of the recusal law was simply personal in nature due to its stated purpose and timing. They said that it therefore constituted an improper use of the Knesset's power to pass and amend the country's quasi-constitutional Basic Laws.
They ruled that this could be remedied by changing the implementation date of the legislation itself. The recusal or incapacitation law included a change to an ambiguity in Basic Law: The Government whereby the attorney general and the High Court could potentially have had the power to order a prime minister to recuse themselves from office, as per the Times of Israel.
That could have possibly included a violation of a conflict of interest agreement such as one that Netanyahu has signed. Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara in February warned the prime minister that he would be in violation of his conflict of interest agreement if he involved himself in his government's controversial judicial overhaul legislation.
Petitions were subsequently filed to the Supreme Court asking it to instruct the attorney general to order Netanyahu to recuse himself. They argued that the prime minister was involved in legislation that could affect the identity of the justices who hear a likely eventual appeal in the Netanyahu trial.
The coalition then passed legislation that stipulated that the power to declare the prime minister incapacitated lies with the government and the Knesset alone, based only on medical grounds. The latest ruling is the second time in the past week that the Israeli Supreme Court intervened in the legislation of Basic Laws.
Read Also : Hezbollah Chief Says Hamas Leader's Death 'Won't Go Unpunished,' And ' Group Will Not Stay Silent'
Benjamin Netanyahu's Judicial Overhaul Attempt
The situation comes about a year after Netanyahu proposed a sweeping overhaul to the country's judiciary. It would, in effect, put it under his personal thumb. The proposal prompted mass protests that succeeded in blocking most of the overhaul attempt, according to Vox News.
At the start of last year, Netanyahu had just returned to power after roughly one year in opposition. His new coalition, which is seen as the most far-right in the history of Israel, was united around one cause, reining in an independent Supreme Court that was seen as an obstacle to their ambitions.
The previous ruling of the high court was made in an 8-7 decision that struck down Netanyahu's controversial amendment to a Basic Law on the grounds of "reasonableness." The development was unprecedented because the court had never thrown out one of Israel's Basic Laws.
If it were not for Israel's current war against the Hamas militant group in Gaza, the Supreme Court's ruling would have precipitated a constitutional crisis. A professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Reuven Hazan said that there could have been an internal war, said CNN.
Related Article:
Russia, Ukraine Exchange Hundreds of Prisoners of War in Major Swap After UAE Mediation Efforts
