The fact that all of the opposition is against the reform and all of the coalition in support of the reform indicates that there is at least some realpolitik at play.
Anti-judicial reform protests have been confusing from the beginning, with several complicated legal provisions at the crux of the debate, but even more perplexing and troubling for some is how ancillary issues like women’s rights or peace activism are connected to the reform and lead to controversial demonstrations like at the Chief Rabbinate building in Tel Aviv on Tuesday.
Protesters hung a sign from a bridge in Tel Aviv on Saturday night declaring “We don’t kill and we won’t die in service of the settlements.”
Religious Israelis rightly expressed concern that they are under attack after incidents like that on Tuesday, as those living beyond the green line are right to feel targeted by signs like the one seen hanging in Tel Aviv.
There is nothing in the current reform proposals that explicitly addresses disputed territory or settlements, and critics argue that such displays show that the protests are not just about the coalition’s policies to change the legal system, but a political challenge to the existence of the current coalition. The opposition was angered that it lost the election, coalition members have argued, and the losing factions have been trying to unseat the government ever since; fostering judicial reform protests is just a means to that end.
The fact that all of the opposition is against the reform and all of the coalition in support of the reform indicates that there is at least some realpolitik at play.
For many of the anti-reform camps, they genuinely seem to see the provisions of the judicial reform as inextricably connected to their championed causes.Building an Alternative women’s right activists spoke with Jerusalem Post
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-750518 women’s rights activists at the Gan Sacher demonstrations on Sunday told The Jerusalem Post that the entire reform would ruin the system of checks and balances offered by an independent judiciary, and the result would be a tyranny of the majority — a scenario in which minorities ultimately suffer.
