Israeli Parliament Passes Controversial Basic Law on Torah Study Without Key Rights Clause

The Israeli Knesset committee approved the Basic Law on Torah Study in its second and third readings, notably removing the clause that gave yeshiva students preferential rights over soldiers. This removal, however, has intensified confusion about the law's actual implications. The law explicitly will not compel the Supreme Court to uphold the exemption from arrest for yeshiva students, nor will it halt sanctions against draft evaders. Legal experts, including Knesset legal advisor Shagit Afik and deputy legal advisor Avital Sompolinsky, sharply disagreed on what the law can achieve. For the first time, the law introduces "a fundamental value" into Israel's constitution, prioritizing Torah study above other values, though not Zionism or the existence of the Jewish people. This development is part of a political deal between the coalition and ultra-Orthodox parties, exchanging support for controversial judicial reforms for legislation easing draft evasion.

Originally, the Basic Law on Torah Study aimed to prevent the Supreme Court from invalidating the arrest exemption law for yeshiva students. After removing the rights comparison clause, even supporters doubt it will fulfill that purpose. Afik clarified that the law does not apply to specific issues like sanctions or resource allocation and does not support the arrest exemption law. The Movement for Quality Government has already announced plans to petition against the law, and others are expected to follow. Unlike the arrest exemption law, invalidating this Basic Law would be more complex due to its constitutional status and unclear practical effects.

During committee debates, legal advisors warned that retaining the rights comparison clause would have granted yeshiva students advantages in budgets and land allocation and potentially legitimized Torah study without core curriculum requirements. Public criticism led the Likud party to demand the ultra-Orthodox drop this clause. Afik emphasized that while Torah study is strengthened as a value, other constitutional values, including equality, remain robust. Shas MK Yinon Azoulai expressed hope the law would provide judges with additional discretion in balancing equality against Torah study. Sompolinsky requested clarification, noting that removing the clause might render the law ineffective.

The law remains ambiguous but is expected to be invoked in future disputes over religious education, such as conflicts over core curriculum requirements. Observers hope the current conservative yet human rights-oriented Supreme Court will appropriately balance the value of Torah study, and that the next Knesset will repeal this controversial Basic Law. However, under a future judiciary aligned with the current government's reform agenda, the law could enable problematic legal precedents.