Israeli Legal Advisor Criticizes Rush to Pass Basic Law on Torah Study

The Knesset Committee continued preparing the Basic Law on Torah Study for its first reading, aiming to present it to the full Knesset by Wednesday. The proposed law, revised after comments from the Ministerial Committee on Legislation, seeks to establish Torah study as a fundamental value in Jewish heritage and the State of Israel. However, the main focus of the discussion was the legal clarity and implications of the proposal.

Deputy Attorney General Avital Sompolinsky expressed significant concerns, stating the draft is vague and does not clearly define the constitutional value it aims to enshrine. She emphasized that recognizing Torah study as important is insufficient for constitutional codification, which requires precise and practical wording. Sompolinsky also criticized the balancing clause between Torah study and other values as ambiguous, lacking specification of conflicting values, and unsuitable as a basis for exempting yeshiva students from military service.

Sompolinsky further warned that advancing such a complex constitutional arrangement hastily, near the end of the Knesset's term, prevents thorough debate on the values and consequences. She cautioned that the law might suppress public disagreement on yeshiva conscription by embedding it constitutionally without broad consensus. She highlighted the risk of undermining the authority and seriousness of Basic Laws through this rushed process.

In response, ultra-Orthodox MK Yaakov Asher defended the proposal, comparing it to earlier Basic Laws like Human Dignity and Liberty, which were also vague and passed with slim majorities. He accused the legal advice of hypocrisy. Committee legal advisor Arbel Estrhan noted the proposal’s unclear implications and lack of constitutional language, criticizing the use of the term "balances of justice" as legally undefined.

MK Moshe Gafni, a bill initiator, argued that Torah study has become disparaged and requires constitutional protection, citing changes in societal attitudes and court rulings affecting yeshiva students. Opposition MK Elazar Stern criticized the timing and content, calling the bill unsuitable as a Basic Law because it contradicts Israel’s Jewish and democratic values and lacks consensus. He questioned which other fundamental values the bill intends to balance against Torah study.

The committee’s debate reflects deep legal and political tensions over the status of Torah study and military service exemptions, with the bill’s future uncertain as it approaches the Knesset floor.