Reform of the Constitutional Process

Project Director: Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer
Research Team: Dr. Yotam Benziman Dr. Margit Cohn Adv. Hilli Mudrik Even Chen Dr. Khalid Ghanayim Adv. Efrat Rahaf Adv. Ram Rivlin Mr. Amir Weizenbluth Mr. Guy Wertheim

At the beginning of the 1990s, with the entry into force of two Basic Laws in the field of human rights (the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom and the Basic Law on Freedom of Occupation), Israel entered a new constitutional era. At present, various issues related to human rights are on the Knesset's legislative agenda. These developments have had a profound effect on Israel's legal system and have required the amendment of dozens of existing laws, including the Penal Code and the Laws on Criminal Procedure, Prisons and the Granting of Business Licenses. In recent years, at the request of the Minister of Justice, the Israel Democracy Institute has been involved in the drafting of the necessary amendments. The real significance of the new legislation lies in its educational value: it helps to justify the existence of liberalism within Israeli society and compels legislators and government institutions to closely examine the Basic Laws, in order to ensure that the norms contained therein are also expressed in existing legislation. The Government and the Knesset are expected to carry out a similar examination, particularly in relation to the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Freedom. This is a enormous task, since a large proportion of existing legislation dates back to the period of the Mandate, when democratic values and human rights were not a constitutional priority. The Israel Democracy Institute, in consultation with the Ministry of Justice, is involved in a sweeping process of constitutional reform, which includes the analysis of hundreds of laws in an attempt to harmonize them with the new Basic Laws. In fact, it appears that this multi-year project will lead to a
genuine constitutional revolution in Israel.

Prof. Kremnitzer's research team will seek to enrich discourse on basic concepts of constitutional law and international public law. Developments in legislation and applications of laws and norms which affect the democratic nature of the state, mainly in a negative way, will be monitored. This project will also strive to improve the penal law, adapting it to a modern democratic state. Similarly, developments relating to the judiciary and the attorney general's office will be monitored and proposals prepared regarding criteria for their effective functioning. Additionally, in cooperation with Dan Meridor, the complex relationship between state security and democracy will be researched.

Focus in 2004
Emphasis will be on the issues of human dignity, balancing, proportionality, judicial activism, media ethics, and extortion. Proposals for legislation will be prepared on offences against the democratic regime; offences against property; and homicide. Together with Dan Meridor, a forum of experts will be convened for the purpose of discussing democracy and terror. Prof. Kremnitzer and his team will also collaborate with the Constitution by Consensus educational project in order to generate materials for civics teachers on freedom of speech, as well as with Prof. David Nachmias towards finalizing work on political corruption and accountability.

Publications in Preparation during 2004
Seven position papers:
"The International Criminal Court and Israel"
"Nullification of Citizenship"
"Official Secrets"
"Terrorism and Democracy" (together with Dan Meridor)
"Judicial Activism"
"Media Ethics"
"Extortion"
Two books on the issues of Harassment and Libel.

Conferences Planned for 2004
Two conferences on Media and Democracy
Two conferences on Proposals for Legislations of Offences
A conference on Corruption and Accountability



Previous Publications:
1. The (Emergency) Defense Regulations, 1945
2. The General Security Services Bill: A Comparative Study
3. Incitement, not Sedition (English publication)
4. The Proposed Reform of the Court System: Advantages and Dangers
5. Pornography: Morality, Freedom, Equality
6. Religion and the High Court of Justice: Image and Reality
7. Religious Sensitivities, Freedom of Expression and Criminal Law
8. Affirmative Action in Israel: Defining the Policy and Legislative Recommendations
9. Freedom of Occupation - When Should the Government Regulate Entry into Professions?
10.Freedom of Expression against Government Authorities
11. Sub Judice: Freedom of Expression in Matters under Adjudication

Legal Seminar Publications (Hebrew, with English abstracts)

1. Protection of Free Speech in a Democratic Regime
2. The Rule of Law in a Polarized Society
3. Judicial Performance - Critique and Evaluation
4. Freedom of Speech




------------------------------------------------------
Social Rights - Should they be included in the Constitution?

Prof. Avi Ben-Bassat and Dr. Momi Dahan, March 2004

Social Rights in the Constitution and Economic Policy
Avi Ben-Bassat and Momi Dahan
English Abstract

Since the founding of the State of Israel there has been considerable public debate concerning the need for a constitution. The Basic Laws passed since 1992 are important milestones in the development of the constitution, but do not include aspects that are customarily included in other constitutions. The "Constitution by Consensus" team established by the Israel Democracy Institute is working to develop a comprehensive proposal for a constitution. This volume provides the infrastructure for considering whether social rights should be included in the constitution, and if so, what should be the desirable level of commitment.

The inclusion of social rights in a constitution is a controversial issue, both in Israel and around the world. For two decades countries with constitutions have debated whether social rights should be afforded constitutional protection or left in the realm of ordinary law. In Israel several proposals have been drafted regarding the inclusion of social rights in a future constitution. The first of these was prepared in 1948 by the Constitution Committee of the Provisional Council of State, and included a broad spectrum of social rights. Most of the subsequent versions were less detailed and committed than the first proposal.

Renewed discussion of the place of social rights in the constitution requires clarification of the grounds in principle and practice; it is also appropriate to draw on the experience of other countries with constitutions. The first chapter of this book reviews the international landscape regarding the inclusion of social rights in the constitution, and presents quantitative indices of constitutional commitment to social rights in 68 countries. The large sample of countries makes it possible to address two questions: first, can groups of countries be characterized according to their constitutional model regarding social rights? Second, to what extent is the constitutional commitment to social rights translated into practice?

A constitution is not the only arrangement by which a system of government can influence social rights. Reinforcing the democratic process by providing due representation for the underprivileged may also serve to protect such rights. While the political power of the underprivileged may prevent excessive inequality in the long term, the opposite also applies. A low level of inequality tends to reduce social tensions, increase political stability, and stimulate economic growth.

It was once assumed that income equality may harm economic growth. The evidence of recent years has shown, however, that in most cases inequality hinders growth. Income equality, growth, and democracy thus go hand in hand. The second chapter of this book analyzes these interrelations as part of the infrastructure for examining whether social rights should be included in the constitution, and what the level of commitment should be.

The need for a constitutional commitment to social rights also depends on the level of inequality in society. Those advocating the inclusion of social rights in the constitution see this as part of the protective net of basic human rights, and one of the safeguards against excessive inequality. The need for such a safeguard is greater in a society characterized by profound gaps in wealth and opportunities. The third chapter examines the sources of inequality in Israeli society.

It is also important to ascertain the sources of inequality in Israel in order to adopt a stand regarding the level of constitutional commitment to social rights. Determining a scale for this depends on considerations of principle as well as on the access accorded under current arrangements in the absence of a constitution. The stand taken will depend on whether these arrangements ensure a high level of access to health services but relatively proscribed rights to education, for example.

The final chapter presents the various considerations presented, and concludes with the recommendation that a clear-cut commitment to social rights be included in the constitution of the State of Israel.

The main conclusions of each chapter are as follows:

Chapter A: Social rights in the constitution and in practice- the main findings

In this chapter, we construct an index of the constitutional commitment to five social rights in 68 countries: the right to education, health, housing, social insurance, and workers' rights.

The frequency with which rights are mentioned in a constitution varies. The right to social security, for example, appears in the constitutions of 47 countries, albeit with a relatively low level of commitment. Only 21 countries commit themselves to the right to housing, however.

Is there such a thing as a typical constitution as regards social rights? Two clear groups emerge among the countries examined. The first provides a high level of constitutional commitment to social rights, and this is typical of countries whose constitutional history derives from the tradition of French civil law. The second group, in which social rights are limited, includes countries whose constitutional history is based on the Common law legal tradition. The constitutional commitment to social rights in countries with a socialist past is closer to that of countries whose tradition is that of French civil law, while countries with a German or Scandinavian tradition are closer to the common law pattern.

We also examined whether the constitutional commitment, reflecting a society's basic preferences, was translated into government policy, accounting for the effect of per capita income, demographic composition, and the strength of democracy. We found that a constitutional commitment to social security does in fact have a positive and significant impact on transfer payments. There is also a positive correlation, though not a statistically significant one, between a constitutional commitment to health and government spending on it. A constitutional commitment to health also has a significant impact on policy performance, as measured by life expectancy or infant mortality. However, a constitutional commitment to the right to education does not influence educational policy, as represented by the extent of participation of relevant age groups in elementary education, and is even negatively correlated with government spending on education.

Chapter B: Equality, democracy, and growth-the main findings

Democracy, economic equality, and the growth of per capita income are important objectives in western countries. In the past it was assumed that these goals were mutually contradictory, and hence it was considered necessary to distinguish between them. Studies undertaken in the 1990s of the relations between these variables have shown that in many countries they actually reinforce one another, while in others they coexist peacefully.

The resilience of democracy, as reflected in the electoral process and civil liberties, increased as standards of living and levels of education improved. Reducing disparities by providing the underprivileged population with a higher standard of living and better education serves to strengthen democracy.

The stronger the democratic foundation of a society, the greater the role of the underprivileged in the election process. This serves to increase government spending, including that on education. The shift in the allocation of resources helps to reduce inequality in income allocation, both in cash and in kind.

The influence of democracy on economic growth is complex, since this is evinced through several channels that have opposing effects. The more democratic a regime, the lower the level of economic inequality, the greater the extent of political and social stability; and the higher the level of human capital. All these channels increase economic growth. However, democratic countries also display a higher level of government spending, as well as lower incentives to invest in the means of production, thus impacting negatively on growth.

The various effects of the strength of democracy on growth neutralize one another. Whenever democratic rights are limited, however, an increase in democracy serves to accelerate economic growth.

All the studies but one show that reducing income inequality does not hamper economic growth, and in fact stimulates it. The correlation between equality and growth is reflected in three channels: (1) Greater equality enhances political and social stability, thus increasing the motivation to invest in the means of production; (2) Greater equality serves to increase investment in education for the population as a whole; note that investment in the means of production and human capital are the two key factors underlying growth; (3) A lower level of inequality dampens the incentive to adopt a policy aimed at changing income distribution by increasing taxation and expanding transfer payments and other social expenditure. While this fiscal policy may hamper GDP growth, no empirical evidence was found to support this view.

Chapter C: The sources of inequality in Israel- the main findings

Income inequality in Israel has risen over the past three decades, and Israel is now one of the countries with the widest economic disparities. This development is the result of factors that apply to all sections of Israeli society as well as to elements that are unique to specific populations: Arabs, new immigrants, and the ultra-orthodox.

The inequality in education is higher than in many other countries, despite the relatively large share of government expenditure on education.

The dire economic plight of the Arab population is one of the main sources of income inequality. This stems partly from discrimination against this population in education and the labor market. Inequality between Jews and non-Jews contributes approximately 16 percent to total income inequality.

The parlous economic condition of the elderly is another key factor behind the high level of income inequality in Israel. Many of the elderly came to Israel at a relatively advanced age, and had no pension rights from their countries of origin.

The government's declining commitment to full employment, as evinced by the flow of migrant workers in recent years, is another cause of income inequality.

Although the ultra-orthodox do not contribute notably to income inequality in the sample, this segment nonetheless accounts for a higher poverty incidence

The disincentive to work inherent in welfare payments causes part of the population to remain outside the work force, leading to a very low level of income. While income inequality among employed persons is lower than for those who do not participate in the work force, the distinction is limited.

Alongside its high level of income inequality, Israel suffers from inequality in net income. Although this is somewhat greater than in most European countries, it is only slightly above its level thirty years ago.

The level of inequality in net income reflects the government's intervention via taxes (income tax, health tax, and National Insurance contributions) and the system of welfare payments (particularly National Insurance payments). While the lower level of inequality in net income than in gross income reflects the government's efforts to reduce this disparity, its contribution is purely technical. To date, no study has been undertaken to examine the government's contribution incorporating the negative impact of welfare policy on the incentive to work.

Over the past two decades there has been a real increase in transfer payments, making a direct (technical) contribution to reducing inequality.

Alongside the expansion of transfer payments, in the last twenty years there has also been a substantial increase in the share of indirect taxes in total taxation, and a sharp reduction in subsidies. The low-income population bears a heavier burden of indirect taxes, but this has not been directly reflected in calculations of net income inequality.

Government intervention is also evident in education and health services, which influence both current and future income. Central Bureau of Statistics estimates indicate that these services are provided progressively. Given the findings regarding the achievements of the education system, however, further studies are needed in order to examine whether this is in fact the case.

Income inequality has increased in western countries, particularly the United States. Three main factors appear to explain this: skiled-bias tecnological change, globalization, and the decline of the labor unions. These factors are also evident in Israel, in addition to those specified above.

Chapter D: The inclusion of social rights in the constitution- pros and cons


The pros
1. Social rights are a precondition for maintaining human dignity. Civil and political rights can only be realized if social rights exist. The right to life is meaningless without a minimum income and access to health services.

2. Most countries include social rights in the constitution, albeit with a relatively low level of commitment. Our study shows that the right to education is the most common, featuring in the constitutions of 51 countries out of 68. The level of commitment to this right also seems to be the highest. The right to social security appears in the constitutions of 47 countries, though with a relatively low level of commitment. Workers' rights (29 countries) and the right to housing (21 countries) are the rarest.

3. protecting social rights in the constitution may provide a safeguard against the excessive growth of inequality in the allocation of income and national wealth, as this inequality embodies social, political and economic dangers. Income inequality in Israel has risen over the past three decades, and Israel now has one of the highest levels of income inequality.

4. The inclusion of social rights in the constitution may provide a safety net for minorities and augment their sense of security. The inferior economic situation of the Arab population in Israel is partly responsible for the high level of income inequality, and is due in part to discrimination against this population in education and the labor market. Income disparity between Jews and non-Jews accounts for approximately 16 percent of total inequality.

5. The greater the level of income inequality, the greater the social upheavals, and hence the graver the threat to the stability of the democratic system. Social unrest may also assume violent forms, at both individual and social levels. At the individual level, economic gaps may generate crime, particularly against property. A milder manifestation of instability occurs when groups organize to secure benefits at the expense of others. Particularly great disparities may lead to demonstrations and even riots. Maintaining social stability in Israel is particularly important given the many schisms within society.

6. Numerous studies have shown that the greater the level of inequality, the greater is social and political instability, thus impairing economic growth.

7. Studies show that a more equal society has a faster growth rate, since the investment in education per child is greater.

8. Alongside the high level of income inequality, the inequality in net income is only slightly higher in Israel than a typical European country. One of the main reasons for the high level of inequality is the disparity in education between different sections of the population. Accordingly, it is important to develop a scale of social rights that prioritizes education. Investment in education is the most effective way of enabling individuals to escape from the cycle of poverty, reducing reliance on government support in generations to come.

9. The inclusion of social rights in the constitution will create an educational and political tool that limits the tendency of the legislature to harm groups that are too weak to exert direct political power.

10. Many of the arguments against the inclusion of these rights in the constitution may be neutralized or diminished by restricting judicial review, as well as by enacting legislation that accords the legislature and government extensive discretion alongside binding constraints.

11. All the comparative studies show that the courts are extremely reluctant to extend judicial protection to issues that require the allocation of substantial resources.

12. Israel's constitution should mention social rights, since the Basic Laws passed in 1992 provide constitutional status for property rights and the freedom of vocation, thus creating a clear imbalance regarding the legal status of social rights.

The cons
1. While reflecting the preferences of society, the realization of social rights, but must be subject to the limited resources available to the economy and the desired extent of government expenditure. Protecting social rights is important, but may ultimately impair social welfare by harming other values, such as the right to property or the ability of the individual to realize his or her full potential. In certain circumstances, awarding far-reaching social rights is liable to act as a disincentive to work, thus depressing economic growth and preventing a rise in standard of living.

2. Priorities change from time to time, and this may also require changes in the rights granted by the state. Tying the hands of the policy-makers will make it difficult to adjust policies to meet changing conditions. For example, a commitment to a particular level of pension is liable to prove difficult to maintain if the share of the elderly in the population increases significantly, as has been the case in Europe over the past 50 years. Realizing this right will place an unreasonable burden of taxation on the working population.

3. To a large extent, the constitution grants the Supreme Court authority in all matters relating to controversial social rights. The legal arena is not the appropriate forum for expressing changes in public preferences or understanding the needs that arise from changing economic circumstances. Ensuring that a decision of this kind is supported by all citizens, and in a democratic system by their elected representatives, will make a response to changing economic circumstances and public preferences possible.

4. Such civil rights as freedom of speech or religion are absolute and inalienable. Social rights, by contrast, are more quantitative in nature. This is difficult to phrase in the verbal form customary in a constitution, however clearly worded. Civil rights also have a quantitative dimension, but to a much lesser extent. Thus, in order to realize the right to vote, an election budget is required, although its scope is relatively insignificant. Social rights, on the other hand, should find expression in the extent of government expenditure on various services and transfer payments to those in need. Even if the way a particular social right is formulated in the constitution is sharp and binding, its practical application may still vary widely. An examination of the effect of a reference to social rights in the constitution on total government expenditure yielded mixed results. Our study shows that some countries succeeded in formulating their constitutional commitment to social security in a manner that was manifested in practical terms. However, our findings also indicate that a high level of commitment to education, as manifested in the explicit declaration that this will be provided gratis, does not ensure its practical implementation, since it may be expressed via fewer or more study hours, a lower or higher quality of teachers, and a larger or smaller number of students per class.

The first three chapters of this book do not yield a clear conclusion on whether social rights should be included in the constitution, although they argue both for and against the inclusion of social rights in the constitution. The ultimate conclusion must be based on weighting and summarizing these arguments, as well as on value judgments.

The decision for or against the inclusion of social rights in the constitution will be the outcome of the relative weight attributed to each of the various contentions. We believe that the sum total of arguments tends in favor of including social rights in the constitution, first and foremost the right to education and social security, however without judicial review of primary legislation.


All rights reserved to the Israel Democracy Institute

http://www.idi.org.il/english/article.php?id=d870466cc1ad4d1bd777b0122f4b4cf4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rabin, in my opinion, is not a particularistic myth for the Israeli left - he is a myth for all of Israel, and if this is the case then the "sanctity" of this site is the sanctity of Israeli-ness and it should be protected."



Haim Zisovich: We are continuing to deal with the rally in memory of Rabin and the graffiti that was found on his memorials in other locations. Good-day to Prof. Yedidya Stern from the Law Faculty at Bar Ilan University and the Israel Democracy Institute.

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Good Afternoon.

Haim Zisovich: Earlier I was talking Commander Sedbon, Commissioner of Police. They are investigating, in an attempt to discover who wrote those slogans, but the laws for which they will be arrested or the investigation is being conducted because they are suspected of breaking laws such as destruction of property or unsuitable behavior in a public place. Should the law deal with negative behavior of this kind with methods other than those already in use?

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Look, there is certainly a degree of tension between freedom of expression and the need to protect key values of society and culture so that they are not trampled by individuals. I would look at Rabin Square as a place that, for significant portions of Israeli society, represents something of an Israeli holy site. We have religious holy sites, we have historic holy sites, but we have almost no contemporary Israeli holy sites. Perhaps Ammunition Hill is one such site, perhaps the Knesset Building was once such a site, before its status declined. Rabin Square is such a site, at least as we approach the anniversary of Rabin's death. And if Israeli law thinks it is important to prohibit by law the desecration of any type of holy site, we should think about other sites that are important enough that their desecration would constitute a criminal offense.

Haim Zisovich: Because of their symbolism, not because of where it is located. Because in reality, when we relate to a monument as property so that, let's say, causing damage to it is similar to destroying a fence or a tree, then the site is diminished to some degree, as is the memory it is supposed to engender.

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Certainly. The sanctity of a physical thing is, naturally, not sanctity in a religious sense, and sanctity - in the sense that it unites us - is our own myth. Rabin, in my opinion, is not a particularistic myth for the Israeli left, he is a general Israeli myth. And if this is the case, then the sanctity of this place is the sanctity of Israeli-ness, and it needs to be protected.

Haim Zisovich: And damage at such a place is not only damage to the memory of Rabin the man, it goes beyond that. It is, perhaps, a demonstration of the fact that objecting to political assassination or using a murder weapon against a political enemy has not penetrated Israel society.

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Whoever destroyed the monument said, Not only am I not part of the political camp of the late Yitzhak Rabin but, first of all, I am not part of the broader Israeli national consensus represented by this myth of Rabin. Second of all and more importantly, he is actually kicking sand in the eyes of all of us and saying, Look, this happened eight years ago and I'm doing it again. I don't want to but, essentially, I am doing the exact same thing. I'm taking what all you Israelis think is a major part of your perspective in the right place and at the right time so that really, the way you do it is justifiable. [Reshet Bet will devote almost all the rest of its news programs to this topic.] Because I say, gentlemen, I am opposed to all this togetherness. I have a different system of values. This system of values is valid for Israel society.

Haim Zisovich: And is this, in your opinion, a case where this display of tasteless and vulgar radical nationalism is, allegedly, the memory rather than the feeling of those who remember Rabin or who remember the assassination? Is this a case where these displays are being carried out in society's hotbeds of religion, or some of them?

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Look, I think that there are two elements here, and each of them is important and we cannot address only one of them. On the one hand, certainly there are portions of the religious public who are committed to other, extra-democratic systems, which they believe contradict democracy or, to be more precise, that democracy contradicts these systems. Such people have a Messianic approach to history and the facts don't necessarily interest them because they have their own plan with which they are very familiar, and it leads them to draw the necessary conclusions and, therefore, the facts don't matter so much. This is one type of problem. But it is important to recall that at the same time there is another type of problem, of a broader nature, and this is that the general Israeli commitment, the internal Jewish commitment and the Jewish-Arab commitment to democracy is very much on the wane. Perhaps those same ones who spray graffiti and desecrate monuments are doing us a favor by reminding us over, and over, and over again that we are in deep trouble. In terms of our commitment to democracy, it is shocking to learn that out of 32 countries where an index of democracy exists, we are in last place together - with only one other country - regarding the subject of whether a democratic regime is even desirable.

Haim Zisovich: Then again, with regard to opposition - not opposition to democracy, on the one hand people abuse the name of democracy, everyone talks about democracy. On the other hand, there is a willingness to break the law in order to promote a political idea, and this can be found on the fringes of the political right, but also on the fringes of the left.

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Certainly, I can quote you the figures regarding the position that a strong leader is better for a country than all the discussions and laws, that is, the rule of law - no less than 56% of Israel's residents agree with this. Every other person listening to us now agrees with that statement, certainly not only the religious or the left, and certainly not only the right - it's Israel.

Haim Zisovich: The ultimate question is, apart from our hurt feelings and apart from the desecration of the man's memory, is today's atmosphere preparing us once again for a radical act such as political assassination?
Prof. Yedidya Stern: I don't know how to answer that question because it is clear that the preparation does not exist, but the possibility almost certainly does exist. Perhaps we should relate this to what I heard you say at the beginning of the program, when you talked about the verses from this week's Torah portion. I want to remind listeners that in the portion of Noah, God promises us that he will never bring another flood upon the world; human existence is assured. From a religious perspective, this promise is connected to the rainbow. What is a rainbow, and what is the internal connection between the rainbow and the promise of existence? The rainbow is composed of different colors, and although each one is different from the other they all blend into the other. If we were to place all of the colors one on top of the other, that is, if we wanted uniform ideas, the result would be black. The fact that we actually don't agree with one another and can still be part of the same rainbow is the essential promise for our continued existence. If someone comes along and thinks differently he allows himself to perform violent acts whose most dramatic outcome is to jeopardize Israel's sovereignty via political assassination or killing the prime minister. Is this possible? Yes, very possible. Have we done enough to prevent it? Certainly not. Can the answer be found through the rule of law? Certainly not. The answer lies within the education system, and on the religious level, the public level. The resources we allocate for teaching democracy are much lower than we would want them to be, lower than what they should be given our serous situation. Our national security is in jeopardy because of such allocations.

Haim Zisovich: Prof. Yedidya Stern, I thank you very much and Shabbat Shalom.

Prof. Yedidya Stern: Shabbat Shalom.

Haim Zisovich: We here at Reshet Bet of the Voice of Israel want to remind you that tomorrow, beginning at eight o'clock, we will be broadcasting live the gathering at Rabin Square in memory of our late prime minister who was assassinated.
------------------------------------------------------------

Constitution by Consensus and the Israel Democracy Institute
Launch New Campaign:
NIS 4,500,000,000
That's the price of three election campaigns in five years!
That's the price of unstable government!!



Tuesday, December 10, 2002

This evening, Constitution by Consensus and the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) are launching a new campaign to put promoting the drafting of a constitution agreed on by all of Israeli society's various sectors and strata on the political agenda during the election period.

Constitution by Consensus calls on the candidates running for Knesset to adopt the issue of a constitution and to help promote the constitutional move being led by Constitution by Consensus. In doing so, they would be placing at the disposal of the Israeli public a tool that would stabilize government (by regulating the method of elections and the way in which the elected institutions work), would determine agreed upon rules of the game that would constitute a basis for dialogue and would bridge the gaps and rifts that threaten to tear Israeli society apart.

The campaign will begin this evening with television spots, under the heading,
"NIS 4,500,000,000 - That's the price of three election campaigns in five years; that's the price of unstable government." At the same time, the campaign's ads will appear in newspapers and on various Web sites. The Constitution by Consensus campaign was created by the Bauman-Bar-Rivnai advertising firm, which undertook to promote this issue pro bono.

The campaign is another phase in a process that began nearly three years ago: We believe that in the reality that currently exists in Israeli society a constitution cannot be drafted without dialogue between the various parties and without a process of discussing and formulating agreements. Toward that end, about two and a half years ago the IDI established the Public Council for Drafting a Constitution, headed by retired Supreme Court President Meir Shamgar. The Council's composition was determined such that it would faithfully reflect the range of opinions and attitudes in Israeli society. It includes about 100 public figures, including politicians from all parties, judges, academics, heads of authorities, public servants and businesspeople, who represent all of society's sectors (Jews, Arabs, secular, religious, ultra-Orthodox, veteran Israelis, immigrants, etc.).

Council members include the following politicians: Tzipi Livni, Dan Meridor, Haim Oron, Michael Eitan, Talab al-Sana, Moshe Arens, Yossi Beilin, Muhammad Barakeh, Uzi Baram, Rabbi Moshe Gafni, Yitzhak Herzog, Matan Vilnai, Eliezer Sandberg, Naomi Chazan, Ahmad Tibi, Shaul Yahalom, Meshulam Nahari, Ofir Pines, Meir Sheetrit and Natan Sharansky.

At conferences held by the Public Council since its establishment, the various sections of the constitution taking shape were discussed. During the discussions, we saw that the gaps are not as wide as it may seem, and that it is possible to achieve consensus even on issues that appear to be impossible to bridge: for example, on issues of religion and state - between religious and secular, or on issues of religion and nationality - between Arabs and Jews.

We call on the 16th Knesset to adopt Constitution by Consensus and during its term to complete the process of legislating a constitution, which began with the founding of the state.

For further details and to see a preview of the campaign's ad spots:

Orit Reuveni, IDI Spokeswoman, 02-530-0864 or 051-545-425 (mobile)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Army & Society
The Army and Society Forum
Project Head: Prof. Baruch Nevo

Research Assistant: Sigal Sasson

The Army and Society project, established in November
2000, brings together the Chief of Staff and other high-ranking IDF officers with leading academics, individuals from the public sector and the media to examine the delicate relationship between the armed forces and the Israeli polity and explore new ways of achieving more sound and effective interaction.

The forum meets several times a year dealing with issues which are of mutual interest to the army and to society. The proceedings of each conference are published in book form.

Publications:
Eight conferences that have thus far taken place, have resulted in three English books and six Hebrew ones:

English:
1. Women in the Israel Defense Forces
5. The Army and the Press during Hostilities
6. Morality, Ethics and Law in Wartime

Additional Hebrew books:
2. Human Dignity in the IDF
3. The People's Army? The Reserves in Israel
4. The Contract between the IDF and the Israeli Society:
Compulsory Service
7. The IDF and the Israeli Economy (Forthcoming)
8. The IDF and Israeli Society Fighting Terror (Forthcoming)

Project Focus for 2004
Possible topics to be studied in 2004 include: ethical and legal issues in times of war against terror; the impact of three years of Intifada on Israeli society and on the IDF; socio-economic gaps in Israeli society and their implications on the army; a professional versus volunteer army; and the involvement of parents in their children's service.

-------------------------------------------------

Structural Reforms in the Israeli Economy

Head: Prof. Avi Ben-Bassat

Three-year Work Plan for 2004-2006

This new project focuses on three main topics: structure of supervision of the capital market, the national budget process and economic policy, and reform of monopolistic fields. After completion of the work on the first two topics, a central branch of non-competitive market structure (such as local media, ports, electricity, refineries, banking, insurance, etc.) will be evaluated.

Focus in 2004
The structure of supervision of the capital market: Five different authorities supervise the capital market in Israel, resulting in several problems which need to be discussed and resolved (e.g.: double supervision in some areas; an imbalance of supervision among similar activities and lack of unity in the means of supervision among authorities). Each authority's tasks and responsibilities will be compared to those of their counterparts in western democracies, and alternative models will be examined for their appropriateness to Israel.

The national budget process and economic policy: Israel's budgeting process incorporates input from many different authorities and bodies. The existing process will be analyzed and its advantages and shortcomings considered and compared with the situation in other countries.

Publications in Preparation during 2004
A report on "Capital Market Supervision."

Conferences Planned for 2004
Two conferences on Capital Market Supervision (Dec. 2004).
A conference on a topic and date yet to be announced.
------------------------------------------------------------
Religion & State


Project Directors:
Prof. Aviezer Ravitzky and Prof. Yedidya Z. Stern
Research Team:
Dr. Yitzhak Brand
Mr. Yossi David
Mr. Shuki Friedman
Mr. Yohai Ofran
Dr. Amihai Radzyner
Mr. Yair Sheleg

Project Description
The relationship between religion and state is one of the most crucial issues in the cultural and political life of Israeli society. It creates political parties, topples governments and takes center stage at any public debate on the constitution, law or civil rights. In addition, it is at the core of the argument concerning Israel's national identity and culture and puts a decisive stamp on its relations with the Diaspora, in the shape of the Law of Return and the Conversion Law. It can safely be assumed that the relationship between religion and state will continue to present a source of problems and controversy - at the communal, legal, ideological and existential level - in the future. The Israel Democracy Institute is therefore examining alternative approaches and models with relation to this issue, on the basis of Jewish and Western sources, with the aim of offering new solutions and perceptions. At the same time, the Institute is also examining the social and ideological tensions that arise from Israel's constitutional character as a state that is both Jewish and democratic.

The issues to be tackled in the upcoming period are separation of religion and state, which is a continuation of previous years' efforts; separation of nation and state and separation of nation and religion, which are new dimensions of the previous issue.

Prof. Ravitzky's topics include:

* The question of Jews and non-Jews in the State of Israel: The problem of a nation-state in the 21st century has become particularly acute in Israel, whose population includes Arabs, foreign workers, new Jewish and non-Jewish immigrants, and ultra-orthodox Jews who are against the idea of a Jewish nation-state. The theoretical, historical and Halakhic aspects of various scenarios of possible models of co-existence or multi-existence in a sovereign state will be researched.

* Religion and state in contemporary Jewish thought: This project, which is meant to deepen social discourse about religions and state and offer a variety of models from traditional sources, will continue.

Prof. Ravitzky and Prof. Stern jointly address:

* Penetration of Halakha into Israeli law. An in-depth examination of this topic will be carried out. What are the differences between this phenomenon and religious law; between traditional content and traditional language; between cultural influence and religious coercion?
Separation of religion and state: In addition to the question of the separation of religion and state, two questions have recently been included in the public discourse: separation of nation and state and separation of nation and religion. These three questions deal with the fundamentals of identity and culture and the project will conduct in-depth research on these topics, from their historic and cultural aspects, and will offer possible models for an independent Jewish society in modern times.

Prof. Stern's topics include:

* Law and Halakha: The cultural disputes that exist in Israel become dangerous when they are translated into normative disputes between the law and Halakha and this struggle poses harsh consequences for democracy and Judaism alike. The role of Halakha and religious legislation will be examined and analyzed on the basis of liberal philosophy.

* Secularism and Halakha: One of the main points of tension in Israeli society is the non-acceptance by religion of secularism. Research in this field will propose a fresh Halakhic attitude towards secularism that may facilitate a major breakthrough in religious-secular relations.
State and Halakha: A secular Jewish state is a new phenomenon and Halakhic authorities are thus hard-put to formulate Halakhic positions on the implications of a secular state and its institutions, and often take a critical and antagonistic stance towards the state. This creates dissonance for the religious polity on the one hand, who are committed to Halakha as interpreted by the Halakhic authorities, and the state on the other hand, which is dominated by a secular majority.

Law and Halakha. The project will explore, analytically, historically and socially, the role that Halakha could and should play in times of religious and state crises. Two alternative models to the current model of coercion through religious legislation will be presented. Each will be analyzed from a democratic, religious and social standpoint.
Secularism and Halakha. Religion's attitude towards the secular individual is expressed in religious legal terms that carry grave normative ramifications. The project offers a new Halakhic attitude towards secularism that could transform religious-secular relations.

State and Halakha. The project hopes to reveal the penetration of religious-Halakhic concepts into various governmental institutions - the courts, the Knesset, various entities of the executive branch, etc.

Publications in Preparation during 2004
Seven position papers:
"The Tension Between Religion and State: The Role of Halakha"
"Religious Legislation: the Dream, its Shattering and its Future"
"Halakha and Secularism: History and the Present."
"Non-Jewish Immigrants in Israel"
"The Paradox of Jewish Theocracy"
"Jewish Religion and World Religions"
"Language and Religious Law"

Books:
"Theology and Politics" by Joseph E. David.
"Rabbis and their Attitudes to Democracy and Liberalism" by Yair Sheleg.
A compendium of articles on "Judaism and Democracy and Democracy: Culture, Society, and State," edited jointly by Prof. Stern and Prof. Ravitzky.
--------------------------------------------------------
How to Get Here

The Israel Democracy Institute is located in the neighborhood of Talbieh, at 4 Pinsker Street, Jerusalem 92228. Mailing address: POB 4702, Jerusalem 91046.

Telephone: 02-530-0888 Fax: 02-530-0837

The Publications Department and the Project for a Constitution by Consensus are located at 2 Sokolov Street, corner of Keren Hayesod, Jerusalem 92144. Mailing address: POB 4482
Jerusalem 91040.

Telephone: 02-566-7989, 1-800-20-2222
Fax: 02-563-1122