Q&A: Israel’s Limping Democracy
Israel’s Limping Democracy
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I stand bewildered by the moves taking place in the Knesset lately. Instead of a situation in which members of Knesset vote on laws according to their personal conscience and according to the public that sent them, threats are being made behind the scenes that force MKs to do what the prime minister requires of them—threats like removal from the chairmanship of a committee, coalition punishments, inability to bring forward bills, and more. Is this what is called democracy??
I don’t understand how this is different from threatening a judge that if he rules against some person his promotion will be delayed, or alternatively that he will receive rapid promotion to a coveted position. That is bribery at its finest!! And if that is so regarding judges, who only rule with discretion according to the law, what shall we say about the legislative branch itself, the Knesset, which is supposed to create the laws according to which the judges will rule? In my view, there is here a complete mixing of the legislative branch and the executive branch (the government), when in practice the government almost completely controls the views of the coalition’s members of Knesset (especially Bibi, who is a master at this), and nobody says a word.
Although I am among the supporters of the judicial reform, I wonder to myself whether maybe this is the reason its opponents were so strongly opposed?
And maybe the solution is to hold separate elections, for the government and for the Knesset, with no possibility of mixing the two?
What does the Rabbi think about this?
Answer
You raise two different problems here.
The first is coalition discipline. This is a complex issue. Members of Knesset are not elected directly. The party is what gets elected. So one can perhaps justify discipline imposed on MKs on core issues.
The problem of the government’s control over the Knesset is indeed a serious one. In Israel there are only two branches of government, not three: the executive and the judiciary. The legislative branch is completely controlled by the executive. I have written about this more than once, and explained that this is indeed one of the central foundations of the problematic nature of the reform, since it further weakens the only weak branch left besides the executive.
There are various possible solutions, but to formulate something concrete would require thought, research, and clarification that I have not done.
I think the governmental situation that has emerged today, and the boiling tension between the two branches we still have, threatens our existence much more than Hamas and Hezbollah together. By the way, both branches are to blame. Both are conducting themselves outrageously.
Discussion on Answer
That’s completely true. But two comments: 1. It is inherent in the nature of the judiciary’s role that it not be dependent on interests and elections. 2. The executive has enormous power and influence, immeasurably more than the judiciary. Therefore balance requires giving it less weight.
I don’t see any solution to this other than cantonization. I don’t understand why, really, we aren’t all working toward dividing the country into cantons. Why are we throwing up our hands and saying it isn’t feasible? Each canton would send an equal number of people to the IDF in the different units, and if they want in the canton of Judea to arrange things so that the Haredim are exempt, they are welcome to do so. Each canton would decide what to do with its tax money as it wishes (aside from general sums for funding security, which would also be divided equally—and here too, if Judea wants to exempt Haredim from paying taxes, excellent, that’s their choice). If in Switzerland, where the sharpest debate is what topping to put on pizza, there are cantons, then in Israel there won’t be? Why are we giving up on this? There is no democracy as polarized and culturally different as Israel’s (even more than the US, where there is significant decentralization, including to the states).
Because the prevailing perception is that even to decide on cantons you need the current majority. And if there is a majority for a decision on cantons, then you no longer need cantons, and that majority could solve the problems in simpler ways. This is in addition to the technical problems regarding cantons—division of land, citizens’ affiliation, and land resources belonging to their canton.
It needs to be in everyone’s interest. Democracy cannot survive with such enormous cultural and value differences unless it is highly decentralized. The situation in Israel is unparalleled. Cantons need to be a national interest; there are solutions to everything, including land division. If necessary, then let Judea get more land—just let us separate as friends, that’s all.
I can’t resist saying that even if both branches are guilty, one of them can be gotten rid of through elections (and if that doesn’t happen, that’s the voter’s fault and not its fault). The second has positioned itself as an Israeli House of Lords, meaning it’s stuck in our throat and does whatever it wants.