Legal Hurdles Loom for Haredi Draft Exemption Deal
Translated & summarized from Mako by baba
Israeli lawmakers are considering draft exemption proposals for the ultra-Orthodox community, including a 2018 plan by Avigdor Lieberman and an override clause, but face significant legal challenges. Experts warn the Supreme Court's stance has hardened due to prolonged inaction, army needs, and inequality. Legal hurdles include defining eligibility, ensuring sufficient enlistment targets, and potential sanctions for non-compliance. Experts doubt an override clause would prevent judicial review, citing evolving constitutional law.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Legal experts doubt proposed Haredi draft exemption plans will pass Supreme Court scrutiny.
- A 2018 plan by Avigdor Lieberman and an override clause are central to negotiations.
- The IDF faces a critical shortage of 12,000 soldiers, intensifying equality concerns.
- The Supreme Court's view has shifted, with sanctions now seen as unavoidable.
- An override clause is unlikely to shield draft exemption laws from judicial review.
Negotiations between Israel's "change bloc" and ultra-Orthodox parties, primarily United Torah Judaism, are focusing on the issue of military draft exemptions. Key proposals on the table include a 2018 plan by former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman and a demand to halt arrests of yeshiva students, alongside a proposal for an "override clause" to exempt individuals from conscription.
Legal experts express skepticism about these proposals' chances of passing Supreme Court scrutiny. Attorney Shlomit Ravitz-Turetzky Paz, Director of the Center for Shared Society at the Israel Democracy Institute, notes that the court's perspective has shifted due to the passage of time, a lack of increase in Haredi enlistment, and the army's critical personnel needs. She stated that the court has waited 30 years for internal Haredi societal changes to foster enlistment without success, and now understands that sanctions are unavoidable.
The dire manpower shortage in the IDF, with a deficit of approximately 12,000 soldiers including 7,500 combat troops, exacerbates the inequality issue, according to Ravitz-Turetzky Paz. She argues that the most severe inequality occurs when it impacts life and limb. For any similar arrangement to pass the Supreme Court, she suggests, civilian service would need to be strictly security-related and limited in scope compared to military service goals. Sanctions for failing to meet enlistment targets would need to be legislated, and the court would likely not permit leniency before targets are tested.
The court might accept a law based on enlistment targets rather than a universal conscription obligation, provided these targets are sufficient to meet army needs. A clear definition of who qualifies as a yeshiva student is also crucial to prevent abuse of exemptions. Effective oversight of yeshivas to ensure accurate attendance and study reporting would be necessary. Ravitz-Turetzky Paz believes a temporary, limited-term law would have a better chance of approval than a permanent arrangement.
Professor Adam Shinar, a constitutional law lecturer at Reichman University, contends that even enshrining draft exemptions in a Basic Law or adding an override clause would not guarantee immunity from Supreme Court invalidation. He points to changes in constitutional thinking since 1994, allowing the court to strike down Basic Laws if they are used for personal purposes or undermine the state's democratic and Jewish foundations. Shinar believes an override clause for such a law would offer limited benefit, primarily delaying the inevitable legal challenge.
Mentioned
