The 'State' Versus the State

The prime minister must find the courage to declare publicly what I hear from cabinet ministers in closed meetings: Gentlemen, the prosecutors and the judges must stop here.

The government took a decision that the residents of Migron who lived on plots of land that were purchased could remain in their homes. The state prosecution objected. The High Court of Justice accepted the position of the prosecution rather than that of the government. The high court, thus, denied the authority of the government to decide on its own policy in Judea and Samaria. The court and the prosecution, rather than the elected government, are the ones who make the decisions.

In order to prevent the Bedouin from gaining control of lands in the Negev, the government offered financial incentives for people to move onto "lone farms." The prosecution objected. And like with Migron and dozens of other cases, the government surrendered.

It would be fitting for the prosecution to do everything under the sun (at least with the same gusto that it fights against Migron, Amona and the lone farms ) to prevent the Bedouin from gaining control of national lands, as well as private lands. After all, we are talking about hundreds of thousands of dunams. But when it comes to the Arabs, the people in the prosecution represent the views held in the academic world and the court system: Israel is committing a sin here and one of the ways to atone for it is to accept Bedouin control over lands.

This is the dominant way of thinking in this system: If within the state we sit in sin, how much more so in Judea and Samaria. And if Jews have purchased land in Judea and Samaria, every possible action must be taken so that purchase cannot be realized. And if they have already built, and paved, and tilled, they must be thrown out of their homes with whatever tricks, or rather legal pranks, it takes. That is the thought process behind the prosecution's unrelenting war, backed by the high court, against Migron.

The opposite of this, the litmus test of legal perversion, is the way in which the prosecution puts up with the ideological delinquency - not only in terms of land - of the Arabs and the Bedouin. And the Arabs are correct when they complain that in Israel there are two sets of laws, one for Jews and the other for Arabs. To justify the Arabs' exemption from having to obey laws - such as those relating to planning and building, taxes and traffic - the legal system adopts weird theories that have been thought up by a group that has declared itself to be anti-Zionist, centered mainly at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

The more they eat, the more their appetite grows. The creeping control by the legal system over the leadership of the state prompts it to go even further, to get involved with technical and professional matters that really belong to the executive branch.

Recall the case in which the high court decided how to protect the schools in the western Negev, how wide the concrete had to be, and by what date the government had to take care of this. Anti-Zionist groups funded by foreign bodies whose aim is to destroy Israel from inside do not stop harassing the system with their appeals to the courts. And the high court, instead of shaking off those who bother it on a regular basis, cooperates with these groups, and does not hide its willingness to do so. We should not be surprised if the high court also takes upon itself the issue of whether to attack Iran.

The boundaries of the legal system are defined in the law books, but because of its eagerness to create a parallel system of government, and because of the weakness of the elected government, the legal system ignores the books. It is possible that in not too many years from now, there will no longer be a need for elections.

The prime minister must find the courage to declare publicly what I hear from cabinet ministers in closed meetings: Gentlemen, the prosecutors and the judges must stop here. You go back to the courtroom and leave us to do the governing. Deciding on the ideologies and values of the state, even if they are wrong in your eyes, is the prerogative of the elected government, not of judges who were appointed to rule on criminal and financial matters. And if you continue to cross the line, the day will come when we will be forced not to go along with your whims. It is highly recommended, Netanyahu must stress politely, that you stop overstepping your bounds.