New examples of why the High Court must be able to strike down laws
An indignant report says that terrorists are receiving free legal aid.
To stop this, MK Moshe Saada claims to have introduced a Bill that would “prevent legal aid to terrorists and the Palestinian Authority.”
This clearly roots in populism. There are no such things as defendants standing trial and having no access to fair legal representation.
The right to counsel is part of the right to a fair trial.
Even Eichmann got himself a lawyer, paid for by the State of Israel.
Just like a wounded terrorist is eligible for top-class medical aid. Just like the medical world must be impartial, so Lady Justice must be blind.
Recently, a broad Knesset majority supported a Bill to strip PA-sponsored murderers of their citizenship. (Again, it cherry-picks the PA. Why?)
Even if it had passed into law unanimously, the High Court must be the grown-up in the room and strike it down.
Since 1961, one cannot just make someone stateless. This follows from the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.
The new Law is a bit toothless since the court must do the revoking, which no judge will agree to. At least not in appeal, eventually to the High Court. Also, most guerillas don’t have Israeli citizenship; it’s or Jordanian or none.
In any case, it shows again why we need a High Court capable to veto laws.
Democracy is not despotism by the majority. Rather, it means that the majority decides, taking all minorities into account. I learned that in school when I was ten in the Netherlands. As long as we have leading politicians in Israel who don’t know this, we must stop laws harmful to minorities.