Israeli Supreme Court Alters Legal Council Appointment Rules, Sparking Constitutional Debate
Attorney Yitzhak Laks analyzes the unfolding controversy surrounding the Second Authority Council appointments, highlighting a significant constitutional issue about the balance of power between the Knesset and the Supreme Court. The dispute began as a disagreement over appointments but escalated into a critical test of the Supreme Court's authority to interpret or effectively change explicit legislative provisions.
According to Section 7(a) of the Second Authority Law, the government is authorized to appoint a 15-member council based on the Communications Minister's recommendation after consultation. Communications Minister Shlomo Karai followed the prescribed procedures, culminating in government approval of the new council on March 24, 2026. After concerns about a conflict of interest involving the Prime Minister, the government reaffirmed the appointments on March 31, 2026. However, petitions against these appointments led the Supreme Court to freeze the new council's installation on May 15, 2026, instructing the outgoing council to continue serving.
Following the court's decision, six members of the outgoing council resigned, leaving only seven members. The law requires a minimum of two-thirds (10 members) for the council to function legally. On June 17, 2026, the Supreme Court, led by President Yitzhak Amit and Justices Alex Stein and Ruth Ronen, ruled that the resigning members would not be counted in the quorum calculation, effectively lowering the threshold from ten to seven members. This judicial reinterpretation altered the statutory formula established by the legislature.
The court justified its decision by suspecting the resignations aimed to obstruct judicial proceedings. Attorney Laks argues that while such suspicions warrant investigation and swift judicial remedies, they do not grant the court authority to amend explicit legislative requirements. In response, the government issued a declaration on July 5, 2026, refusing to recognize council actions that violate the statutory quorum, asserting that judicial orders contradicting clear laws undermine the rule of law.
On July 7, 2026, the Supreme Court emphasized the fundamental obligation to obey court rulings and warned public officials of personal liability for noncompliance. This episode reveals the court's overreach from interpretation into legislation, effectively assuming legislative powers by changing the quorum number from ten to seven. The case underscores urgent questions about judicial appointments, the Supreme Court's power to annul legislation, and the status of Basic Laws, especially as up to ten new Supreme Court justices may be appointed soon, shaping Israel's constitutional future.
Attorney Laks, a member of the Israel Bar Association and chairman of the Communities Foundation, calls for public attention to these issues in the upcoming elections, asking who should truly write Israel's laws: the elected Knesset or a court that redefines legal thresholds by interim rulings.
