• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Return to Home Page

Yeshuatami News Blog

All Things Israel

  • Conflict
    • Terrorism
  • History
    • Aliyah
    • End-time Prophecy
  • Politics
    • US
  • Israel
    • Holidays
    • Our People
  • From the Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archive
  • Give

Politics

Iran – The Head of the Octopus

October 15, 2024 By Bella Davidov Leave a Comment

“You will set Your throne in Elam (Persia, today Iran), And will destroy from there the king and the princes, We pray You destroy the evil anti-semite regime of Iran and its military that aims to destroy Israel…You will bring disaster upon them, Your fierce anger,’ ‘And I will send the sword after them Until I have consumed them.'”
According to Your Word, Lord in Jeremiah 49:35, 38 

O God, You are more awesome than Your holy places. The GOD OF ISRAEL is He who gives strength and power to His people.

Iran, the arch enemy of Israel, which many Israelis consider to be the head of the octopus, is today the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and the greatest threat in the Middle East. Iranians are not Arabs but they are Shiite Muslims. The Iranian revolutionary regime’s basic ideology opposes Western values and interests.

Iran aim is to reach the Mediterranean coast and Israel’s borders by creating a passage through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon by providing advanced weapons to its terrorist proxies to attack Israel. Today, it uses this passage to transfer military equipment and terrorists to Israel’s northern border.

Iran’s Nuclear Program

The development of Iran’s nuclear program poses an existential threat to the Jewish state and the rest of the world. It even risks triggering a nuclear arms race with the Arab world, further destabilizing the region and damaging U.S. interests. For years, the PM of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu has warned leading world nations in the world that the leading state sponsor of terrorism can never be allowed to obtain the world’s deadliest weapon. The Iranian regime has fooled the world by consistently lying of the true purpose of its nuclear program and hiding key aspects of it. Israeli intelligence has exposed Iran’s true intentions by breaking into Tehran’s Nuclear archives, demonstrably proving that Iran has been engaged in a nuclear arms developing program.

In June 2022, the IAEA Board (International Atomic Energy Agency) censured Iran for failing to provide “technically credible” answers regarding hidden nuclear sites, expanding its nuclear program beyond agreed limits, and limiting international inspectors’ access to suspected undisclosed nuclear sites.

By spending enormous amounts of money to further its nuclear project and funding its terrorist proxies throughout the region, the Iranian regime demonstrates that this is its priority over providing for their own people.

Iran’s Objective

The Ayatollah’s aims is to expand Iran’s influence in the Arab world by spreading hatred to Israel and America.

Iranian leadership encourages its people in public events to burn and stamp on US and Israeli flags and chant the slogans “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”.
Picture of Khamenei from X

Furthermore, along with verbal demonstrations of hatred toward America and Israel, Iran has taken action against the two Western nations.

The regime is a threat to U.S. forces stationed in the region, to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other U.S. allies. Since 1979, the Iranian regime has invested resources in attacking Israel and American forces deployed in the Middle East and beyond.

Iran’s Arsenol

Iran has the largest and most diverse ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East. It is the only country to develop a 2,000-km missile without first having nuclear weapons capability. Most were acquired from foreign sources, notably North Korea.
Picture from War on the Rocks
 It is noteworthy that Israel has more ballistic missiles, but they are fewer in number and type.

The fundamental motivation behind Iran’s supreme Muslim Shiite leadership is anti-Antisemitism. Since it took over rulership in the revolution, it has deemed Israel as illegitimate. According to its religious concept, “Palestine” (the land of Israel) belongs to the Muslim Palestinians and not to the ‘Jews.’

In their pure antisemitic libel propaganda, Israel is a Western imperialist state and the Jews advance American imperialism in the Middle East. According to the Ayatollah’s regime, this is a struggle between good (them) and evil (America, the big satan, and Israel the little satan.) and that Muslims have a religious obligation to resist Israel and global Jewry, accusing the Jews of being the first to start anti-Islamic propaganda.

Iran’s “Sacred Duty” and the Proliferation of Anti-Semitism

The Ayatollahs claim that resistance to the Jewish state is the sacred duty of “every Muslim and anyone who believes in Allah.” “Israel is a cancerous tumor on Islam’s body [in the Middle East] that must be removed [from existence.]”

Recently, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei declared: “The divine promise to eliminate the Zionist entity will be fulfilled and we will see the day when Palestine will rise from the river to the sea.” (that is the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea (which is today the land of Israel.)

Iran’s supreme leader leads in Holocaust denial, making such false ridiculous statements as: “there are documents showing close collaboration of the Zionists with Nazi Germany, and exaggerated numbers relating to the Jewish Holocaust that were fabricated to solicit the sympathy of world public opinion, to lay the ground for the occupation of Palestine, and to justify the atrocities of the Zionists.”

For four decades, the Iranian regime has propagated hatred for Zionism and the Jews by promoting the infamous booklet, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and other anti-Semitic tracts.

Iran trains and arms terrorist groups, such as Hamas, Palestine Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah, promoting their attacks on Israel.

For the last year, the Head of the Octopus Iran has been using its arms to fight Israel on several fronts. With ground troops in Gaza and Lebanon, Israel’s air force backs those forces by bombing enemy targets to thwart attacks from Yemen and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria. Israel also fights Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists in the Judea and Samaria.

Escalation

Iran’s last missile attack last week could likely provoke an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.This would open the largest, biggest, and most intense front so far.
(Illustration from The Cryptonomist)

Last Monday, 7th of October, Israel marked the first anniversary of the October 7, 2023 massacre when thousands of Hamas terrorists stormed into southern Israeli cities and villages, destroying civilian homes, murdering, burning, beheading, and raping and kidnapping over two hundred Israelis.

Two people were injured on the Memorial Day of October 7th, 2024, while sirens sounded across central Israel as a result of rockets fired by Hamas from northern Gaza.

An estimated tens of thousands of Iranians participated in a procession through Tehran with a leader enticing the crowd in chanting “Death to America!” “Death to Israel!

Before the October 7th first anniversary, in a video statement on October 5th Benjamin Netanyahu said: “Today, Israel is defending itself on seven fronts against the enemies of civilization…and we are fighting against Iran, which last week fired over 200 ballistic missiles directly at Israel and which stands behind this seven-front war against Israel,” Netanyahu added.

The Iranian ballistic missile barrage came in response to the limited Israeli ground operation in southern Lebanon to eliminate the Hezbollah threat. It was the first land incursion since the war against Hezbollah in 2006.

Following intelligence that Hezbollah is hiding its weapons and missiles inside homes of southern Lebanese villages, the IDF informed the Lebanese residents to evacuate before the IDF dismantled the Hezbollah infrastructure, underground tunnels included.

“We are targeting Hezbollah strongholds that threaten northern Israeli towns, kibbutzim, and communities along our border,” said IDF spokesman Daniel Hagari. He presented evidence that Hezbollah was planning an operation involving thousands of its terrorist fighters copying Hamas’ October 7, 2023 terror attack on Israel.

“Hezbollah turned Lebanese villages next to Israeli villages into military bases ready for an attack on Israel,” he said. In addition to ground raids, the Israeli Air Force has also increased its air attacks on  Hezbollah headquarters since mid-September, including the capital, Beirut.

Terrorist Leadership and the IDF

Until now, Israel has eliminated the commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force following the air raid Damascus on 1 April 2024, Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Teheran, Hezbollah leader and key Iran ally Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut on 27 September and many top Hezbollah commanders. All the while the IDF continues to target Hamas, Hezbollah, and all other regional foes.

Octopus (Illustration from Stable Diffusion Website)

Filed Under: Conflict, From the Newsletter, MainStoryWidget-right, Politics, War Tagged With: Hezbollah, Iran, Terrorism, War

Does Lebanon Have Complete Control Over its Diplomatic Agenda?

September 23, 2024 By Bella Davidov Leave a Comment

For the past eleven months, Hezbollah, the pro-Iranian militia, has been fighting Israel in solidarity with Hamas in Gaza. While neither Hezbollah nor Israel appears to seek an all-out war, the situation could spiral out of control. On the ground, the risk of escalation is very real. Washington and Paris have decided to “coordinate closely” concerning Lebanon to avoid such an escalation.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah continues to expand its influence. In addition to the financial support it receives from Iran (several hundred million dollars yearly according to the U.S.), the militia receives donations from the Lebanese Shia diaspora and profits from both its legal and illegal (drug trafficking) businesses. Since the 2000s, Hezbollah has developed an integrated economy organized around a bank (al-Qard al-Hassan), powerful charities, and the al-Sajjad network of local supermarkets, offering discounts on basic goods. These economic structures insulate the southern region from the rest of Lebanon, and now, protect it from the effects of the national economic crisis.

Hezbollah has adopted a wait-and-see attitude. With patience it takes its time, counting on the slow disintegration of the country, weakened by double-digit inflation.

Michel Aoun – Image from Simple Wikipedia

Lebanon has been governed by a caretaker cabinet since Prime Minister Hassan Diab resigned in August 2020 amid protests demanding accountability for the Beirut blast, when a stockpile of highly explosive ammonium nitrate was stored improperly at Lebanon’s most vital port. Michel Aoun, the Lebanese president at the time, accepted the resignation of the government and the Prime Minister and asked the government to stay on in a caretaker capacity until a new cabinet was formed.

On 10 September 2021, Mikati was able to form a government of 24 members after long negotiations with President Aoun, and the various political parties. When he took office, Lebanon was in the grip of a very serious economic crisis: the collapse of the national currency, galloping inflation (the cost of food had jumped by 700% in the previous two years), massive layoffs, a poverty rate of 78% according to the UN, frequent power cuts, fuel shortages, etc. Mikati is depending on the solidarity of the Arab world to help the country out of its crisis.

Najib Mikati – Image from Wiki

Mikati has been backing the Shiite groups, Hezbollah and Amal, but faces resistance from Christian lawmakers. Mikati himself does not represent a political party.

Najib Mikati, a Lebanese politician and businessman, has served as the Prime Minister of Lebanon since September 2021. Mikati said after his nomination that his priority would be to implement a French-backed reform plan that would unlock much-needed foreign financial aid.

Lokman Slim, Image from Times of Israel

Different sectarian groups are operating in Lebanon. Lebanese politics is based on a power-sharing system among these groups, including Hezbollah. Hezbollah, a Shia Muslim organization that emerged in the 1980s, has by now near total control over its own community, which it also represents in parliament. Dissenting Shia voices against Hezbollah have all but disappeared following the assassination of a Shia public intellectual and vocal Hezbollah critic, Lokman Slim, in 2021. Supporters of Hezbollah had previously threatened Slim’s life.

The leaders of Lebanon’s two major communities, the Sunni Muslims and the Christians, and those of the smaller but politically powerful Druze community, have issued statements urging caution and restraint. Yet, some Sunni and Christian groups in particular are sympathetic to Hezbollah.

Unlike the secular Sunni Muslim Lebanese, who call for restraint, religious Sunni Islamist groups are now siding with Hezbollah against Israel since the start of the Gazan war and some have even gotten closer to the organization over the past nine months.

In the past, many Sunni Islamists in Lebanon were against Hezbollah after an intense brief burst of violence in 2008, when Hezbollah attacked Sunni supporters of the then-Lebanese government.

Another Sunni group is the Lebanese branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose Al-Fajr forces, however symbolic and limited, have participated in the hostilities against Israel in southern Lebanon alongside Hezbollah since late October 2023, and even lost seven of their fighters in May of 2024.

Lebanese Christians are divided into three political parties, and so is their position towards Hezbollah: the Kataeb and the Lebanese Forces (LF) on the anti-Hezbollah side, and on the other side the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) which has broadly supported the Shia Hezbollah party since 2006.

In recent months, the leaders of both the LF and Kataeb have opposed Hezbollah’s war of attrition against Israel which they claim is provoking Israel to attack and devastate Lebanon. However, they are powerless against Hezbollah. Nevertheless, they complain that Hezbollah is acting and making decisions in the name of all Lebanese citizens.

Two other important Christian groups are the Patriarch of the Maronite church, Bechara Boutros Rai, and a rightwing private militia in eastern Beirut called Jnoud al-Rab (Soldiers of God).

Bechara Boutros Rai, Image from Catholic Weekly

Jnoud al-Rab claims that Hezbollah’s actions are endangering the country and Lebanon’s Christian community. In January 2024, the group hijacked flight screens at Beirut airport and displayed a message warning Hezbollah against engaging in war with Israel.

Since November 2023, Patriarch Rai has regularly issued statements against Hezbollah’s involvement in the Gaza war and has urged officials of the need to protect Lebanon.

In June 2024, he described Hezbollah’s activities in the south as acts of terrorism, which caused the Shia religious leadership to boycott the Patriarchate’s June spiritual summit.

Gibran Bassil, Image from the Arab News

As for the FPM party that has been favorable to Hezbollah, the relationship has become increasingly strained since October 2022, when the then president Michel Aoun’s term came to an end and Hezbollah refused to support EPM’s leading candidate as the new president and Aoun’s son-in-law, Gibran Bassil.

In April 2024, Bassil came around and declared that the FPM supports “the Resistance” (Hezbollah’s adopted name), but “rejects Hezbollah’s position to participate in the Gaza war without internal national consensus”.

Druze

The leading Druze politician, Walid Jumblatt, is the weathervane of Lebanese politics. Despite being retired, he remains an important voice for the Druze (who constitute around 5% of the Lebanese population).

Walid Jumblatt, Image from Arab News

In October, he called on Hezbollah “not to be dragged into the war”. He also took to social media asking Hezbollah not to participate in the war.

However, he clearly stated at the beginning of the conflict that he would side with Hezbollah should Israel attack Lebanon. And, since then, Jumblatt has noted that “the rules of engagement have changed”.

Lebanon’s major communities have largely been consistent in urging restraint and would prefer to see Hezbollah avoid a war with Israel. Should war break out, however, the sects of Lebanon will probably all rally around Hezbollah, as was the case in 2006.

History of Wars Between Israel and Lebanon

Since the end of the Six Day War, Palestinian terrorist militant groups have initiated attacks from south Lebanon against Israel, and even against Lebanese Christian militias inside Lebanon in the mid-1970s. In reprisal, the IDF, Israeli Defense Force have attacked in different operations, the most notable of which was the Litani Operation in 1978.

In 1975, the Lebanese civil war broke out, which lasted until 1990. With its own army operating freely in Lebanon, the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization) had created a state within a state in south Lebanon. By then, more than 300,000 Palestinians lived in Lebanon. Lebanon’s Muslims and leftists who supported the PLO sought more political power. The Christians, seeking to maintain their political dominance, opposed the PLO. The factions fought fiercely through early 1976, and Lebanon became divided, with the Christians in power in the north and the Muslims in the south.

Israel helped the Christian Maronite militias by supplying them with arms, tanks, and military advisers. Initially, Syria, fearing loss of commercial access to the port of Beirut, supported the Maronites who had the majority in the government. Later, however, Syria switched sides by supporting the Palestinians instead.

In 1982 the Israeli army entered southern Lebanon with the goal of destroying the Palestinian guerrilla bases. The battle resulted in the expulsion of the PLO from Lebanese territory and their relocation to Tunisia.

In 1989, Christian leader Gen. Michel Aoun attempted to drive Syria out of Lebanon but was defeated and the Arab League mediated a peace deal. Aoun’s removal from power in October 1990 marked the end of the civil war and eliminated one of the major obstacles to the implementation of the 1989 peace accord.

Following the PLO’s expulsion from Lebanon, the Israeli military and Lebanese Christian militias began fighting the growing Iran proxy Shia Muslim terrorist group, Hezbollah, in south Lebanon, marking the beginning of the ongoing fighting between Hezbollah and Israel.

Filed Under: Conflict, MainStoryWidget-left, Politics, War Tagged With: Hezbollah, Lebanon, Terrorism, War

Reform in the Israeli Judicial System

January 28, 2023 By Bella Davidov Leave a Comment

Should Supreme Court Judges be elected instead of appointed?

Should Judicial Pronouncements be subject to Knesset approval?

The Supreme Court’s main purpose is to interpret the law and defend the Constitution. It must assure that laws follow the Constitution.

The Supreme Court in the U.S.

In the most democratic republic, the US, the court’s main purpose is to interpret laws passed by the legislature, to defend them, and adhere to the Constitution which is the foundational governing document of the country, adopted and amended by “We the People.” Supreme Court Justices may hold their position as long as they choose unless the Senate impeaches them. Anything else is a usurpation (the act of taking control of something without having the right to do so, especially of a position of power.)

The US Supreme Court functioned as an antidemocratic institution when it declined to enforce federal laws because the unelected judges disagreed with Congress about whether they are constitutionally appropriate.

While President Lincoln was in office, the court decided that Congress had no power to restrict the spread of slavery. President Lincoln gave reasons why Congress, and not the Supreme Court, should have the final word on what the Constitution requires. He stated:

“The candid citizen must confess that if government policy upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by the Supreme Court,” the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”

Lincoln was in essence saying that a self-governing people (elected by the majority of the citizens) should have the power to determine what their fundamental law meant.

Lincoln’s argument wasn’t that the Constitution shouldn’t be enforced, but that democratically, Congress was the best institution to enforce it. If people or state governments disagree about a law’s constitutionality, they can campaign to repeal that law. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to Congress. Currently, there are nine justices in the US Supreme Court.

However, if the Supreme Court decides not to enforce a federal law, the majority of justices actually declare that their view is superior to everyone else’s. Even if the president, more than 500 members of Congress, and the four other justices interpret the Constitution as permitting a law, if five justices disagree, then the law is not enforced.

The Supreme Court In Israel

In Israel in the last three decades, the left lost the elections except for the last government that was formed with a minority of voters since the right-wing parties, headed by the largest party, Likud, was shy of one Knesset Member in order to form a coalition.

Judge Aaron Barak, Wikipedia

About 25 years ago, the Supreme Court headed by leftist judge Aaron Barak gradually took control over government policies and Knesset legislation by doing exactly what President Lincoln was against. Israel is the only country in the world where the Supreme Court makes laws without a conscious decision by the government legislative authority.

There is now an absurd situation where the government is restricted from expressing its position, which represents the majority of its citizens since it is bound by the non-elected few legal advisers. The notion that a group of judges protects democracy better than legislators has no basis, nor should there be a difference between the rule of law and the rule of judges, which is now the case in Israel.

Through the years, the attorney general, government legal advisors, and the Supreme Court have managed to block successive Likud governments from advancing their policies across a great number of issues. They gave themselves the authority, binding decisions to overturn any government decision and law, which is unreasonable in their opinion.

The new Justice Minister Yariv Levin has proposed a series of changes aimed at curbing the powers of the judiciary, including allowing lawmakers to pass laws that the High Court of Justice has struck down.

Justice Minister Yariv Levin, Wikipedia

The suggested reforms in the judicial system will first of all further politicize the process for electing judges, giving the government control of appointments, the government’s involvement in the election of the High Court’s Chief Justice; thus allowing the government to create a new position of State Prosecutor.

Now, with Justice Minister Yariv Levin’s judicial and legal reform plan representing the first real threat to their grip on power, the judicial system and its supporters in the media and the far left are threatening to overthrow the government.

Levin has proposed a law that would empower the country’s 120-seat Knesset to override Supreme Court decisions with a simple majority of 61 votes. Levin also proposes giving the government control of appointments, and the government’s involvement in the election of the High Court’s Chief Justice, making it more difficult for the Supreme Court to abolish bills and allowing the Knesset to overturn such rulings; bar the Supreme Court from intervening on Basic Laws and with a majority of 61 Knesset members, allow the Knesset to re-legislate laws the court does manage to annul. Legal advisors to public ministries will be appointed by the ministers, and absolve ministers of the requirement to abide by their legal advisors’ guidance, weakening the position of the legal advisor to the government.

Levin plans to restore power that was grabbed by overly intervening judges back to elected officials.

Another critical limitation on the court that is necessary by the reformation is removing the court’s ability to use the clause of “reasonableness” which is not actually a law but decisions that are “reasonable” in the judge’s opinion, which they have used for years to abolish important government and local authorities decisions. Because “reasonableness” is based on opinions and not actual laws, the new government opposes it and proposes to change it.

“We go to the polls, vote, elect, and time after time, people we didn’t elect choose for us… that is not democracy,” Levin said last week when outlining the major components of his reforms during a press conference in the Knesset. These reforms will strengthen the legal system, and restore the public’s trust in it. They will restore order: It will allow the legislatures to legislate, the government to govern, legal advisers to advise, and judges to judge.”

The leftists fear that the government will have ultimate power that it will use not only against LGBTQ rights and illegal immigrants but also in elections and free speech and anything it wants. These fears are unfounded since the government is bound by the existing Basic Laws.

Filed Under: MainStoryWidget, Politics Tagged With: Aaron Barak, democracy, government, Yariv Levin

Democracies

December 7, 2022 By Bella Davidov Leave a Comment

US Democracy/Republic

Unlike the ancient Greek democracy, the US system is at its core, not a pure democracy, but a constitutional republic with democratic elections, as clearly stated in the U.S. Constitution: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government.” This differs from the original ancient Greek democracy, which the American founders believed to be a corrupt form of government. There are fundamental differences between pure democracy and constitutional republic forms of government.

The Difference between a Democracy and a Republic

The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications for minority rights. Both forms of government use a representational system, where citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government.

In a republic, a constitution, or charter of rights, protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters.

In a so-called pure democracy, the majority is not restrained in this way. It can impose its will on the minority. It also differs from a representative democracy in which constituents choose leaders to govern according to their interests.

The US is a democratic republic that guarantees fundamental rights and liberties and features an electoral system combining direct elections for legislators and indirect voting (through an electoral college) for the President. 

Other Nations

Given that the US is a republic with democratic elections, Americans may not understand how it compares with other forms of government.

For example, unlike the United States, the United Kingdom has a constitutional monarchy that has democratic elections. Although the UK has a legislative system, its Parliament’s historical foundations are not entirely democratic. Whereas the House of Commons is an elected body, the House of Lords is hereditary, though its authority to originate legislation has been curtailed over the years. Yet, unlike Israel, its government is rarely delegitimized.

Some Muslim countries, like Malaysia, enshrine Islam as the national faith; citizens must be Muslim to be considered ethnic Malaysians. Even though they have constitutions and legislative bodies, certain rights and freedoms are subservient to Islamic law as applied by Sharia courts, and there is no separation between religion and state (which is seen as a purely western invention). 

The Knesset from the .gov site

Israel

Israel is a parliamentary democracy, consisting of legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Its institutions are the Presidency, the Knesset (parliament), the Government (cabinet), and the Judiciary.

The system is based on the principle of separation of powers, with checks and balances, in which the executive branch (the government) is subject to the confidence of the legislative branch (the Knesset) and the law guarantees the independence of the judiciary.

The President in this system has just a few symbolic duties, with no political power. Defined by law, his duties are mostly ceremonial and formal, such as ceremonially opening the first session of a new Knesset; accepting the credentials of foreign envoys; signing treaties and laws adopted by the Knesset; appointing judges, the governor of the Bank of Israel and heads of Israel’s diplomatic missions abroad. He can pardon prisoners and commute sentences, on the advice of the minister of justice.

The President is elected once in seven years by a simple majority of the Knesset from among candidates, nominated based on their personal stature and contribution to the state.

The Israeli parliament, The Knesset is the legislative authority elected in a general election.

The Knesset, through its committees, conducts general debates on government policy and activity, as well as on legislation. Debates are conducted in Hebrew, but members may speak Arabic, as both are official languages; simultaneous translation is available.

Every citizen is eligible to vote for the Knesset from age 18 and to be elected to the Knesset from age 21. Knesset elections, for a tenure of four years, are general, national, direct, equal, secret, and proportional, with the entire country constituting a single electoral constituency. The Knesset may dissolve itself or be dissolved by the Prime Minister before the end of its term. Until a new Knesset is formally constituted following elections, full authority remains with the outgoing one.

Knesset elections are based on a vote for a party rather than for individuals, and the many political parties, which compete for election to the Knesset, reflect a wide range of outlooks and beliefs. Knesset seats are assigned in proportion to each party’s percentage of the total national vote.

The Government (cabinet of ministers) is the executive authority of the state, charged with administering internal and foreign affairs, including security matters. Its policy-making powers are very wide and it is authorized to take action on any issue, which is not delegated by law to another authority. Like the Knesset, the government usually serves for four years, but its tenure may be shortened if the Prime Minister is unable to continue in office due to death, resignation, or impeachment when the government appoints one of its members (who is a Knesset member) as acting Prime Minister.

In the case of a vote of no confidence, the government and the Prime Minister remain in their positions until a new government is formed. All the ministers must be Israeli citizens and residents of Israel; they need not be Knesset members, but a majority usually are. Ministers, with the approval of the Prime Minister and the government, may appoint a deputy minister in their ministry; all deputy ministers must be Knesset members.

To date, all governments have been based on coalitions of several parties, since no party has received enough Knesset seats to be able to form a government by itself.

The Judiciary – Israeli law guarantees the absolute independence of the judiciary. Judges are appointed by the President, upon recommendation of a special nominations committee, comprised of Supreme Court judges, members of the bar, and public figures. Judges’ appointments are for life, with a mandatory retirement age of 70.

Filed Under: From the Newsletter, MainStoryWidget-right, Politics Tagged With: American Democracy, Democracies, government

The Override Law

November 18, 2022 By Bella Davidov Leave a Comment

God’s kingdom is not a democracy. He is the Supreme Judge and we must abide by His rules and law. We affirm, “the world is filled with His glory.” We appropriate the concept of His divine sovereignty. Until Lord Yeshua returns and establishes His Kingdom on earth, ungodly dictatorships rule many nations. Although there are democracies elected by the people, these are also ungodly, but at least they are not dictatorships.

In a democracy, there must be a separation of powers, in which the essential tasks of governance are divided among the three branches of government in accordance with the perceived strengths of each.

  1. The coalition: the Legislative branch, which in almost every democracy is the main, most important power. It is first because it is elected by the people, and represents most of the people.
  2. The second is the Executive branch, ensuring the state is doing what it legislated. This is equally important.
  3. The third ruling power is the Judicial branch, which is appointed (not elected) to oversee that the government acts according to the law it legislated.

In every democracy, the Judicial branch is independent of the other branches. They cannot force the judges in their rulings.

According to Israel’s state law, only the law is above any judge. The Judicial branch is the lesser of the three branches since it is not elected by the people. Its authority is not from the people, who are sovereign in a democracy. This was the condition of the ruling powers in Israel until the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s.

Early in the 80s, a gradual change in the balance of powers occurred when the Judicial branch slowly became the most important branch imposing its power on the other two branches.

How did it happen?

In all democracies, the Judicial branch is the third in power. Even when it supervises the actions of the government according to its authority, it is limited in the scope of supervision it allows itself over the Executive branch, and especially the Legislative branch, which in Israel is the Knesset. The Judicial branch must restrain itself as the law permits since it is not an elected body. Judicial doctrines were developed to give substance to that restraint.

Judicial Restraints Removed

The first doctrine is the separation between the elected government, the ruling power, from the appointed Judicial branch.

This separation discourages courts from intervening in political questions best left to more representative branches of government. The Supreme Court’s role is to safeguard the rule of law and protect individual rights, ensuring that government action violates no explicit law while reviewing the activities of the Executive and Legislative branches. The Judicial branch has no right to abolish government laws or make up new laws that were not voted on and approved by the government. However, such is the case now in Israel wherein exists a sort of Supreme Court dictatorship.

In recent years, the State of Israel has undergone a constitutional revolution, especially with the 1992 passage of the Basic Law: ‘Human Dignity and Liberty.’ This law has only 6 conditions, not including freedom of speech or the right for the Supreme Court to abolish or add laws.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court gave itself rights and the power to abolish Knesset legislation that in the Supreme Court’s opinion violates normative human rights guarantees.

The result is that today virtually every controversy in Israeli public life ends up, sooner or later, in a courtroom.

Justice Aharon Barak

The Supreme Court’s unprecedented power to shape the ideological debate in Israel started and is now dependent on Aharon Barak’s judicial worldview, which is mainly left-wing progressive liberal, with the excuse that the views serve the values of Israel as a “Jewish and democratic” state.

Aharon Barak – photo from Wiki

A brilliant and accomplished lawyer and judge, Aharon Barak was Attorney-General in 1975, and in 1995 became the Supreme Court president, a post he held until he retired in 2006.

Barak’s legal philosophy is that the law always has its say, on everything, and that every human behavior is subject to a legal norm, including politics, by keeping the actions of the government under his view of the law.

However, in a democracy, the court’s capacity to protect the rule of law is limited by the judge’s inherently passive role in politics. No matter how much a government action may offend his sensibilities, a judge can only review a case that comes before him in court, and even then only if the plaintiff has a sufficiently direct interest in the case, and if the issue at hand is of the kind that courts are allowed to adjudicate.

There are principles that limit the power of the judges:

The principle of “standing” dictates that only a party or someone who has suffered an injury to a right or personal interest can be heard (stand before a judge.) This restriction is important for courts to protect themselves from being overwhelmed by what the legal literature calls “unnecessary” litigation cases that do not require a judicial remedy, whose adjudication only distracts the court from properly being used. In other countries, there are laws concerning the principle of standing and the desired scope of limitation. The higher the level of limitations, the less involvement of judges in the ruling of government cases. So, the first thing that Aharon Barak did was to eliminate this requirement for the right of standing from the Israeli Judicial system. Now everyone can petition the Supreme Court in any case and matter, and the government has to be subject to the Judicial branch, meaning his view of the law.

The second principle Aharon Barak canceled was the principle of non-judgment or “justifiability;” determining which issue the court will hear. Because it is the third branch, subject to the other two elected branches, the court should exclude itself from being involved in political matters such as the conduct of foreign affairs best left in the hands of the Executive or Legislative Branches. 

However, now, the Supreme Court can rule in any case and matter presented, without exception, especially in political matters.

Aharon Barak cannot stand the prospect of restricting the Supreme Court, therefore it must intervene even in government, which is an elected legislative power that in a democracy must stay separated from the appointed judiciary power.

Thirdly, Aharon Barak added to the Supreme Court the principle of reasonableness. The Supreme Court decides what is reasonable and what isn’t. Now the Supreme Court can cancel any decision made by the government without exception just because it isn’t reasonable in the judges’ opinion.

Therefore, from now on the name should be: “The Supreme Court of Reasonableness” – the “authority” without authority the Supreme Court gave itself to cancel and add laws.

These are some of the foundations Aharon Barak formed that made the Supreme Court the supreme and only ruler in the State of Israel, not in order to enforce the law, but to make the Supreme Court the ruler of law enforcement, which is contrary to real law enforcement.

The Supreme Court is now the body that decides in any matter, big or small.

Just two examples: 

1. Lately, opposing the office of finances’ opinion, the Supreme Court ordered that loose tobacco be taxed.

2. When Netanyahu was PM last time and legally held several portfolios, the Supreme Court ordered Netanyahu to give up some of them.

To get rid of, not the original Supreme Court, but this Supreme Court dictatorship, there needs to be a Basic Law that will be called, “the law of separation of the ruling powers”, separating the authority of the courts in public law enforcement. This Basic Law will destroy the foundations of the Supreme Court dictatorship formed by Aharon Barak by re-establishing the laws that the Supreme Court abolished without authority. The Supreme Court would be once again the way it is supposed to be.

In recent years, former Supreme Court President Barak and his fellow justices have overruled a number of governmental decisions and actions.

Today any government official in Israel can be brought before the Supreme Court. Indeed, a sizeable number of government moves have already been stopped by the Supreme Court with the excuse of enforcement of the “rule of law.” It has become an ever-expanding empire ruled by judges. As a result, there are serious difficulties for Israel’s democratic political system, and society as a whole. The new government intends to do something about it.

Filed Under: From the Newsletter, Israel, Politics, SideBarStoryWidget-second

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 9
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

  • Return to Home Page
  • Email

The Enemy Within

How Persia Became Iran

How Persia Became Iran Iran was known for centuries as Persia – a name originating from “Parsa”. However, this term was given by foreigners, not the people of the land itself. The indigenous people used the name “Iran,” a word that derives from “Airyam” which is a term found in the country’s ancient texts dating […]

The U.S. Administration – Friend or Foe of Israel?

May 12, 2024

"It will come about on that day that I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples; all who lift it will injure themselves severely. And all … [Read More...] about The U.S. Administration – Friend or Foe of Israel?

Recent Posts

  • 10 Killed, Including Two Children, in Overnight Iranian Missile Strikes
  • The Veil and Israel [Part 1]
  • Purim: Chag Sameach!
  • A Great Miracle Happened Here, Then and Now
  • Christmas and the Jews

Categories

© MMXXV Yeshuatami, Ashdod ISRAEL