For the first time in the history of the High Court of Justice, an expanded bench of all 15 justices will consider petitions against the Law to Cancel the Reasonableness Standard in a hearing on September 12, the court decided Monday.
The High Court has never before struck down a Basic Law amendment, and there has been debate about whether it has the authority to do so.
The Movement for Quality Government in Israel, one of the petitioners, praised the move to expand the bench.
“This is a historic petition designed to repeal the central law in the series of coup d’état laws,” it said in a statement. “The [High Court] president did well to include all the judges of the High Court in this important discussion.”
In response, Likud MK Boaz Bismuth wrote on X (formerly Twitter): “15 people wearing judges’ robes, replacing 120 representatives of the people... this is the end of democracy.”
A hearing for petitions against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over conflict-of-interest violations, which was set for the same day, was postponed.
What are arguments against the Law to Cancel the Reasonableness Standard?
The court will hear arguments for eight petitions filed in rapid succession following last week’s Knesset passage of the Law to Cancel the Reasonableness Standard, an amendment to Basic Law: The Judiciary.
The petitioners include the Israel Bar Association, Smoke Free Israel, the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, and the OMETZ movement.
The petitions said the reasonableness law – which restricted the use of judicial review against government, prime ministerial, and ministerial administrative decisions deemed extremely unreasonable – would damage Israel’s democratic system, was unconstitutional, and procedurally faulty.
The rule of law and balance of powers were damaged by the passing of the law, since the reasonableness standard was a vital tool of the court to check government excess, critics of the law said. Elected officials no longer have a requirement to act reasonably, as this standard has been removed, exposing the system to corruption and political appointments, they said.
The constitutionality of the law was brought into question by the petitioners. They said the Knesset had abused its constitutional authority to pass a law that detailed a specific tool, since Basic Laws are intended to establish the general rules, powers, and structures of the state.
The petitioners also said there were flaws in the legislative process regarding the law, since the bill had been advanced as a committee bill, which is generally reserved for technical matters. Private laws are subject to preliminary votes and a 45-day waiting period.
September is expected to be a month filled with dramatic High Court hearings, with petitions regarding the Judicial Selection Committee to be heard as well.