Judicial Review in Israel: Typology, Developments and the Theory and Practice of Judicial Activism

תקציר

This chapter explores judicial review of legislation in Israel. It offers a typology of the various models of judicial review that can be gleaned from analysing the caselaw: substantive, procedural, semiprocedural, and structural models. It also analyses the developments in these models throughout the years. It additionally evaluates the question of the extent that the Israeli Court exhibits judicial activism or judicial restraint in this area of judicial review. Taking a multi-method approach that combines qualitative analysis of seminal cases with quantitative analysis of the extent of judicial invalidations in the entire caselaw, the study reveals a gap between theory and practice. It argues that, in theory, the Israeli Court is activist, expansionist and pluralistic in its recognition of judicial review models; yet, in practice, it is quite restrained and demonstrates a general reluctance to invalidate laws and a monopolistic preference for a single, substantive model.