Lapid: ‘Thuggish’ reasonableness law is ‘not a Basic Law’ since process was flawed

Opposition Leader Yair Lapid argues in a statement that the issue up for question today at the High Court of Justice isn’t whether the court has the authority to nullify quasi-constitutional Basic Laws, because the reasonableness law “isn’t a Basic Law” and doesn’t even “resemble a Basic Law.”

“This is an irresponsible document that someone wrote ‘Basic Law’ on it and they have since demanded treating it as a holy scripture,” Lapid says.

“The High Court will this morning discuss a law that is a deviant and thuggish private member’s bill by Simcha Rothman, which wasn’t even passed by the government, which was managed in a process that was violent, rushed, sloppy, boisterous and unrestrained, and which has nothing to do with Basic Laws,” Lapid says.

“Those who want Basic Laws to be treated with awe should start by legislating them in an adequate process,” he adds. “Basic Laws have a procedure. A minimum of respect for the process. This minimum didn’t happen. Not even close.”