Shaked warns court against interfering with Nation-State Law
Tova Tzimuki, Inbar Tvizer
Published: 09.10.18, 20:24
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
10 Talkbacks for this article
1. what is the minister of justice afraid of?
2. Nation State Law has no place in the great nation of Israel
DOV ,   USA   (10.09.18)
How can Israel enforce this law without imposing tyranny on the public? It goes against everything that is Israeli. Ask yourself how you would feel if you are an American but if you’re not an Evangelical then you don't really belong, but you can stay for now. For all those affected will all Identification papers have Israeli non-Jew written in them. Will it work against you in any court of law if you are not an Israeli Jew but an Arab or Christian or Buddhist Muslim Ba-hi etc... Jew.
3. declaration of indipendece not legal document
zionist forever   (10.10.18)
The Declaration of Independence is not a legal document but rather an ideal, Jewish state working with the arabs for the good of the region etc but nothing legal.
Without this law there is nothing at all stopping a government to declare the country a sate of its citizens rather than Jewish state and changing all the national symbols with a single piece of legislation, all that is needed is the political will and if it suits a government and they think they can get away with it they will.

Already its become politically acceptable to allow judges & arab MKS not to stand or sing Hatikvah, the left may one day see Joint List as a natural coalition partner if it then only way to get back into power. In politic everybody is in it for themselves so if the country does not have a constitution its survival as a Jewish state and its symbols need to be enshrined in Basic Law and its time the leftist courts stopped constantly trying to overturn legislation.
4. Shaked doesn't respect democracy
Aurélie ,   Paris   (10.10.18)
Shaked doesn't know what she's talking about. In every democracy there is a control over the law by the judicial power. And some crucial decisions were taken by the judicial power which says what the law allows and what it doesn't. For example, in the USA the Supreme Court made several revolutions: in 1954, it ended discrimination at school and in universities; then it stopped the criminalization of homosexuality and established the same-sexe marriage. It stopped the death penalty and established it again, etc, etc. The judicial power is a control of the law to know if every law respects the basic laws or the constitution or the like.
5. Shaked is right
C   (10.10.18)
1 in a democracy the court is not part of writing the constitution.
that is absolutely correct. indeed the constitution precedes
the establishment of a supreme court.
2 if the high court of justice would strike down a basic law, it would
destroy the separation of powers between the legislative and the
judicial branches of government. the separation of powers is
the principle upon which democracy rests.
3 the american supreme court cannot invalidate any part of the
constitution. in order to change the constitution, there has to be
an amendment which requires participation of the legislative
6. Your idea is a simplistiic far right idea
Aurélie ,   Paris   (10.10.18)
Your version of democracy is a far right and extremist version. As always with the far right, the idea is simplistic. Democracy doesn't end with what the people choose. In a democracy the majority has no right to violate minority's rights. Just imagine a majority would decide to send Jews into a ghetto in England, would it be democracy? Then, of course I'm on the left and proud about it. The Israeli right is not the same as what it was in the past, it's more and more extreme and attacking democracy. The Zionist left has to save Israel from its dangerous far right.
Back to article