Weekly Commentary: Can You Answer This Democracy Quiz? Many Failed

Weekly Commentary: Can You Answer This Democracy Quiz? Many Failed
Dr. Aaron Lerner 26 March 2025

Here are just a few multiple choice questions:

1. In a democracy, what should happen to protestors who, in an act of =
civil
disobedience, block a road without a permit?
A. They get on TV and then go home.
B. They bear the consequence of violating the law.
Note: Israel Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara answered “A”.

“=A0In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the =
rabid
segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law
must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the =
penalty. I
submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is
unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order =
to
arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality
expressing the highest respect for law.”
“Letter from a Birmingham Jail” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. 16 April =
1963

2. How do you rule on a case if you are Justice in the Supreme Court and
believe that it does not serve the national interest to rule on that =
case in
accordance with the law?
A. Make the ruling in accordance with the law and in the decision call =
for a
revision of the law.
B. Engage in verbal gymnastics to explain why a ruling which actually
doesn’t jibe with the law is in accordance with an interpretation of the
law.
C. Claim legal precedent which doesn’t actually exist to support your =
ruling
which doesn’t actually jibe with the law.
Note: Supreme Court Justice Barak chose C

“I believe it is fair to conclude that the ‘lineage’ of the rulings by
Justice Barak in the Pinhasi case and by Justice Mazza in the Deri case =
does
not withstand scrutiny. In the binding legal material available to us at =
the
time, these rulings have no foundation for the conclusions reached by =
the
justices.
Even the secondary sources do not provide strong support for these
far-reaching conclusions.”
Ruth Gavison, “The Attorney General: A Critical Look at New Trends,” in
Plilim Vol. 6 (1996), p. 95.

3. What do you do if you have been assigned to negotiate with terrorists =
on
behalf of the Government of Israel and the Government of Israel formally
votes to approve a negotiating position which you oppose?
A. Advise the Government of Israel that you cannot act as negotiator.
B. Arrange to appear before the Knesset Subcommittee for Intelligence =
and
Secret Services so that this Knesset body, which has oversight
responsibility for the most sensitive matters of the Israeli state, is =
aware
of the concerns which you have.
C. Share your concerns and criticisms with the press and others while
continuing to serve in the negotiating position.
Note: Shin Bet head, Ronen Bar, apparently chose C.

4. What do you do when a Supreme Court Justice issues an injunction
preventing you from doing something?
A. Launch a PR campaign implying that you may not honor the injunction.
B. Have your lawyer prepare possibly the strongest submission in =
Israel’s
legal history explaining why the injunction should be vacated while =
stating
explicitly in the submission that the ruling of the Supreme Court will =
be
honored.
Note: Prime Minister Netanyahu did both A and B. Despite the written
submission, there are Likud MKs still doing A. It is noteworthy that PM
Netanyahu’s choice of a combination of A and B succeeded in diverting =
all
attention from the passage of a budget which provides for a massive =
amount
of money for Haredis who opt not to serve in the IDF.=20

________________________________________
IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus =
on
Arab-Israeli relations

Website: www.imra.org.il