Reinventing Israeli Democracy

• What problems can you identify in Israeli democracy?
  
  Our democracy is in the throes of a real crisis: ongoing political instability and the ensuing uncertainty and indications of a possible failure of the Israeli parliamentary system.  Confronted with this reality and the threat to Israeli democracy, there is no choice but to rebuild Israeli democracy. The book, Reinventing Israeli Democracy, seeks to spur public debate through a series of proposals for reforms that are based on three major principals: the reinforcement of the negotiation of parliamentary, representational democracy through political parties; the decentralization of governmental-administrative power; and the expansion of civilian participation in political processes and decision-making.
  
  
• Some calls for change seek to transform Israel's regime structure. Do you support them?
  
  I am entirely opposed to them. The Israeli regime is a parliamentary democracy, and instead of trying to replace the system, we must endeavor to develop and improve it, and to amend the electoral process.
  
  
• Could you briefly explain the key points of your recommendations?
  
  In the book, I affirm that the governance crisis in Israel comprises several clusters of defects, which cannot be separated from one another and which must all be addressed. Nonetheless, I am aware that it is not possible to do everything at once. However, since change must start somewhere, I recommend beginning with the electoral system, and waiting for additional opportunities to resolve the other issues, as described in the book.
  
  I would like to note that the book does not necessarily represent the official positions of the Israel Democracy Institute — it is the product of my own analysis of the research that has been compiled at IDI over the past 18 years and my personal interpretation of the political reality in Israel.
  
  
• What situation will result from the implementation of the reforms that you propose?
  
  It will be a dream-come-true — a stable democracy, based to a large extent on trust, that fulfills all the political, geopolitical and civil functions that a democratic state expects of its institutions.
  
  
• Have the ideas you propose met with any criticism?
  
  Some of the ideas in the book are controversial, and there is nothing wrong with that because the book was originally intended to prominently place on the agenda a proposal that would stir public debate. If, in the course of this debate, there are some who will disagree with one point, but will agree with another, that is fine as long as the discussion remains within the boundaries of parliamentary democracy and does not lead to dangerous ideas, such as a presidential regime, which I consider very alarming. I stand behind the opinions expressed in the book, but am open to debate. Take, for example, my proposal to hold regional elections: While I recommend electing some of the Knesset Members through regional elections, others believe that would increase the interdependency between financial means and governance. I disagree, but the question is debatable. Another example of a controversial idea is my proposal concerning the issue of what I call "gatekeepers": It is my opinion that some gatekeepers abuse their authority, and, therefore, I recommend instating the "French Law", which does not permit the investigation of a Prime Minister while in office, at least for a certain period of time. This recommendation has also been opposed, but debate is an inseparable and positive part of public discourse.
  
  The more controversial a proposal, the more people will wish to address a wide variety of recommendations, to think about them and to discuss them, thus enhancing public discourse.

*Dr. Arye Carmon is President of the Israel Democracy Institute