A constitutional crisis, for many, is an abstract idea – something taught in high school civics, long forgotten, vague, and hard to wrap one’s head around.
Well, here’s a real-time example that makes it easy to understand.
On Tuesday, three High Court justices – Chief Justice Isaac Amit, Daphne Barak-Erez, and Noam Solberg – will hear petitions against the government’s decision to dismiss Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) head Ronen Bar. Amit and Barak-Erez are considered liberal; Solberg is a conservative.
If the court rules in favor of the petitioners and says that the government cannot fire Bar and the government insists it can and moves ahead anyway – that will create a constitutional crisis.
A constitutional crisis is what happens when it is no longer clear which branch of government – the executive, legislative, or judiciary – has the final say. That’s the direction Israel is now heading in.
Under the current system of laws and norms, the courts are meant to have the last word. If the government chooses to ignore that word, then – folks – we’re there.
And if this happens, expect all hell to break loose.
Protests could resume on larger scale
The massive protests of the spring and summer of 2023, driven by opposition to the judicial reform, briefly reignited late last month when news broke of Bar’s dismissal. But just as quickly, they subsided. Why? Because nothing had gone into effect yet. The court had frozen the decision, and people realized the moment to take to the streets hadn’t quite arrived.
But if the court formally blocks the dismissal and the government insists on pushing ahead anyway, expect those protests to return – and on a larger scale.
Histadrut head Arnon Bar-David hinted at this on Monday during a Yediot Aharonot conference, saying a general strike at this point wouldn’t change anything. It’s a last resort weapon, he said, especially considering that 50% of the union’s members would likely oppose such a move.
“The half bullet that I have left I will save until the decision of the High Court is not honored,” Bar-David said.That moment may soon be upon us.
In a drama-saturated country, the weight of tomorrow’s hearing isn’t lost on anyone – least of all the justices.How do we know it’s serious? Because the court proceedings will be broadcast live, something that happens only very rarely – in particularly high-stakes moments. This is one of them.
Or is it?
If the court blocks Bar’s dismissal, then the issue has been framed as binary: Either the government abides by the court’s ruling and does not fire the Shin Bet head, or it defies the court and dismisses him anyway.
This raises multiple dilemmas, such as whose orders the Shin Bet employees then listen to – Bar’s or those of a new appointee?
But there may be a third option.
Government could ignore Bar
In an interview on Sunday on Channel 14, Justice Minister Yariv Levin suggested a workaround. The government might not formally fire Bar – it could just ignore him. Freeze him out. Treat him like a kid in the schoolyard who’s no longer welcome in the game.
That’s more or less what Levin did with the appointment of Amit as the head of the High Court of Justice: He stopped cooperating with him and pretended he wasn’t there.
“I think we should do exactly what we did with Justice Amit. There will be no cooperation with [Bar]. There will be no working with him. I believe this situation will not last even a week, and you will see that the Shin Bet chief will resign on his own,” Levin said. “That’s how it should be.”
But what if Bar – out of principle and with the backing of the High Court and a significant part of the country – doesn’t resign? What then? What about national security? What trajectory does this scenario put the country on?
All this is unfolding while the country is in the middle of a war – a time when unity and coordination between the prime minister and Israel’s security chiefs should be non-negotiable. The Shin Bet is a critical part of this apparatus.And yet, what we’re seeing is not calm coordination behind the scenes but internal chaos on public display.
The Shin Bet, by definition, is supposed to operate in the shadows. The fact that its current and former heads are dominating the news cycle is a flashing red light.
Two weeks ago, former Shin Bet chief Nadav Argaman made headlines by threatening to “spill the beans” on Netanyahu if he felt democracy was under threat.
Last week, the drama surrounding the appointment – and then the retraction of that appointment – of former naval chief V.-Adm. (ret.) Eli Sharvit as Bar’s successor (if the court allowed Bar’s dismissal), arrived.
Then came the taped comments from the head of the Shin Bet’s Jewish Division that were made public on Friday, suggesting that Jewish extremists in Judea and Samaria, whom he undiplomatically called “schmucks,” should be arrested even without evidence.
And now it’s former Shin Bet director Yoram Cohen’s turn.
Where Argaman threatened to expose Netanyahu, Cohen – his immediate predecessor – did just that.
In an Army Radio interview on Monday, Cohen claimed that when he headed the Shin Bet between 2011-2016, Netanyahu asked him to disqualify his political rival Naftali Bennett from serving in the security cabinet by revoking his security clearance because of a “loyalty” issue involving Bennett’s military service in the elite General Staff Reconnaissance Unit. Cohen said he flatly refused.
Cohen, incidentally, is rumored to be a potential candidate on Bennett’s nascent party list.
Netanyahu’s circle responded by accusing Cohen of playing politics: “Another recycling of transparent fake news by Yoram Cohen, who has turned into a politician and is trying to cover-up corruption in the Shin Bet under Ronen Bar through ridiculous lies.”
At this point, the public has no way of knowing who is lying and who is telling the truth. But the damage is done. The result is corrosive: A deepening erosion of trust in the institutions charged with leading and protecting the country.And this, right now – when the threats outside are as serious as they’ve ever been – is not where Israel wants to be.
A homespun definition of a constitutional crisis in Israel might go like this: Who do you listen to, your mama (the government) or your papa (the courts)?
Now, there’s another question in the mix: Who do you believe, the prime minister or the heads of the Shin Bet of past and present?
And some still wonder why the Israeli public is so cynical.
Jesus Christ is King
Comments are closed.