Tribune of Prof. Gilbert Benayoun: Israel, future Frankenstate?

What explains the concern is that this reform of justice as it is proposed looks more like a revolution than a simple reform. It includes several elements, which separately could be the subject of compromise with the opposition in the Knesset, but which adopted together would be likely to call into question the democratic character of Israel.

In 2013, a Princeton professor, Kim Lane Scheppele invented a character named Frankenstate, reminiscent of the hero of literature and cinema, Frankenstein. Like this one, Frankenstate was created in ” combining pieces of perfectly reasonable democratic institutions in monstrous ways, much like Frankenstein’s monster was created from pieces of other living things. No part is objectionable; horror spells jumpsuits ».

Let us return to the statement of the proposals which constitute the heart of the announced revolution.

The derogation law: any law voted by Parliament, canceled by the Supreme Court, can be revoked by a simple majority by the Knesset, which will thus have the last word.

A law, known as the Déry law, named after the former minister of the interior who had to give up his ministerial portfolio by the attorney general because he was under investigation by the courts. This law, if passed, will allow him to regain his place in the government, overriding the court decision.

Full executive control of the nominating committee of judges, including those of the Supreme Court.

The ministerial legal advisers would be chosen by the executive power, which could thus transform them into consiglieri.

Prevent the Supreme Court from disqualifying fundamental laws.

A poll (cf. Israel Democracy Institute) indicates that the majority of Israelis oppose this justice reform. Thus, 66% of Israelis believe that the Supreme Court should retain the power to annul a law if it is incompatible with the fundamental laws of the country. Regarding the Judicial Appointments Committee, 63% believe that the Selection Committee should retain the obligation of an agreement between judges and politicians to reach an agreement. Only 23% think more politicians should be added to the committee so that the coalition has a permanent majority in the selection of judges. Finally, 58% of Israelis oppose that the legal advisers of ministers and the prime minister, currently civil servants of the Ministry of Justice, be directly chosen by the ministers against 31% who support the project to transform these positions into political appointments . Meanwhile, a majority agrees with warnings that the plan will hurt Israel’s economy.

For Financial Times economics commentator Martin Wolf, the preservation of liberal democracy means a country with controls, with a thriving and strong rule of law, and a system that protects the civil, political and economic rights of all its residents – in their entirety. And if he is under threat, as many Israelis I know and trust tell me – of course I am very worried ».

Israeli economic circles are worried and let it be known. In a public letter, several investment houses call for dialogue on the reform plan in order to reach a compromise between the current power and the opposition. Admittedly, business circles get along quite easily with political powers that do not respect the rule of law. But the case of Israel is different, in the sense that employees of start-ups (50% of foreign trade) represent only 10% of the entire working population. For Martin Wolf, Israel’s economy ultimately relies on Israelis and especially the talent of its highly educated and sophisticated people who are creating all these new businesses. I don’t want to pretend to speak on their behalf, but don’t be very surprised if, from any point of view, and not only from a legal point of view, these people start to look at what is going on around them.

For Dan Ben David, of the Shoresh Socio-economic Institute in Israel, these highly qualified workers, less than 400,000 people, “ maintain the economy, the health care system. All it takes is for a critical mass of the most qualified people to leave, and then we are headed in an unsustainable direction, slowly but surely. ».

In 1970, Albert Hirschman published Exit, Voice and Loyalty, a book in which he explained that when a person is not happy with a given situation, he has three choices at his disposal: to leave (exit), to protest (voice) , to remain faithful (loyalty). For economists, a dissatisfied consumer will defect (exit). In political science, a disgruntled individual will let it be known, either through elections or by protesting.

One of the consequences of the implementation of the reform, which fundamentally transforms the judicial system, is that companies in the high-tech sectors risk leaving…in silence (choice of exit). So says an Israeli investment fund manager. For him, ” there is a quiet leak of companies [hors du pays]. Once it is understood that we are heading towards anti-democratic legislation, the majority of taxes on investments and [la haute technologie] will not be paid in Israel, and we will lose an industry that is embraced around the world. » (Times of Israel).

For the record, Albert Hirschman was part of the Varian Fry network, which, in 1941, from Marseilles, helped many Jews to flee the Nazi regime.

Professor Gilbert Benhayoun is the president of the Aix group – which works on the economic dimensions of an agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Territories – which includes Palestinian, Israeli and international economists, academics, experts and politicians. Its first document, in 2004, proposed an economic roadmap, since many documents have been produced, on all the major questions, in particular the status of Jerusalem or the refugee file, each time answers are provided.