But side by side with the factors which should have disturbed the development of the democratic fabric in the State of Israel, there were also forces pulling in the direction of democracy - and it was these forces which were predominant. In fact, there was no other way to bring back to Eretz Israel the Jewish communities from the four corners of the earth - communities with different cultures and traditions - bring them together and mould from them a single political and social entity, which would not crash or disintegrate at the first sign of trouble, except the democratic way.

It is no coincidence that the tradition of parliament democracy started to develop in the Zionist Organization and in Eretz Israel even before the establishment of the State. The Zionist Congress, which first met in Basel in 1907, and the elected assembly, which was the house of representatives of the Jewish community in Eretz Israel in the years 1920-1948, both influenced the structure of the Knesset, its regulations, its modus operandi, the manner in which it is elected, the make-up of its parties and its relations with the executive branch. Even the Great Knesset, which was set up after the first return to Zion (in the 6th century BC), had an influence on the house of representatives of the modern State of Israel - in that the number of Knesset Members was set at 120 on the basis of the assembly that functioned close to 2,500 years ago.

Defense of Democracy

The public is not always aware of the real and important work performed within the Knesset building, and there is no correct and sufficient appreciation of the fact that the Knesset has not only managed to neutralize anti-democratic phenomena, but performs its functions and tasks with praiseworthy success.

On the subject of neutralizing anti-democratic phenomena, it is enough if we bring up two examples. The one, the amendments of 1986 to the "Basic Law: the Knesset" and the Knesset Elections Law, which prevent election to the Knesset from parties that incite to racism and deny the democratic character of the State of Israel. The second, the legislation against "kalanterism" - the phenomenon of Knesset Members moving from one party to another in exchange for positions or material benefits - which appeared in its full ugliness following the fall, through a vote of no-confidence, of the National Unity Government in March 1990.

One of the important tasks assigned to the Knesset was the preparation of a constitution for the State of Israel. Even though 45 years after the establishment of the State the task has not yet been completed, the laborious enterprise continues, and as far as the complex Israeli political reality permits, the Knesset has been legislating, one by one, the basic laws - which will together, as a single unit, constitute the constitution of the State of Israel. It is possible that the task will be completed in the course of the 13th Knesset, for the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee is currently dealing with the final drafting of the "Basic Law: Legislation" which has already passed its first reading, and the "Basic Law: Human Rights". In the drafting of the latter, the legislator faces difficult problems, because there is a fear in religious circles that the drafting of the law in universal terms will contradict the Jewish essence of the State. In order to overcome the difficulties and make progress towards the desired direction, it was decided to legislate this law chapter by chapter, where two passes towards the end chapter, where two passed towards the end of the term of the previous Knesset, and an additional two are currently being dealt with.

The central task of the legislature is to legislate. What singles the Israeli legislature out in recent years is the growth in the number of private members' bills that get through. Between the First Knesset and the Ninth, only seven percent of the laws passed were initiated by backbenchers, while the rest was initiated by the Government. In 1993, close to 50 percent of the laws passed were the result of the initiative of individuals and groups. One of the problems involved in this process is that at least some of the private members' bills, once they become operative, involve vast Government is either unable or unwilling to undertake. On this issue it is important to increase the cooperation between the legislative and executive branches, so that it will not seem as if the latter stands in contempt of the wishes of the former.

Among the most important laws brought up by the government every year for the approval of the Knesset is the budget law and its annexes. In the past this law used to get through third reading with hardly any changes. Today, not only does the Knesset hold a real debate on the controversial articles in it, but the Finance Committee has decisive influence on the formulation of the budget, so that the budget which emerges from the hands of the legislator is different in many articles than that originally presented by the Minister of Finance. It is difficult to imagine a better example of true supervision of the government by the house of representatives, even though in its essence the supervision reflects sectorial and partisan interests much more than national ones.

The Importance of the Committees

As in legislatures in other democratic states in the world, so in the Knesset a major part of the parliamentary work is conducted in the committees and not in the plenary. Traditionally, the Finance Committee and the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee were regarded as the most important of the standing Knesset committees. As has already been mentioned, the Finance Committee plays today a central role in the shaping of the state budget. The Foreign Affairs and Security Committee also plays a more important role than in the past, since the setting up of the Meridor Committee to examine the overall security policy of the State of Israel.

In the last Knessets, the importance of the State Control Committee, which works closely with the office of the State Comptroller, has turned into a much more effective supervisory tool than it ever was in the past, supervising the activities of the ministries and their agencies. The prestige of other committees has also risen, such as that of the Labor and Welfare Committee, the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee and the Education and Culture Committee.

There are currently 12 permanent committees functioning in the Knesset, as well as special committees, committees on a particular matter, and parliamentary inquiry committees. In addition, an attempt was made to make the work of the committees more efficient by limiting the number of members in the Finance Committee and the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee to 17, and in the other committees to 15.

Much has been said in the country about the need for electoral reform, to change the system from one based on the national-proportional method, which causes a multiplicity of parties elected to the Knesset, and the need to set up complicated coalitions which are not always stable - to a system based on constituencies, which is expected to reduce the number of parties. The most recent proposal to have been dealt with in the Knesset, speaks of the election of half the Knesset Members in accordance with the current method (national-proportional), and the other half in constituencies in each of which several Knesset Members will be elected. However, even though during the term of the first National Unity Government, the Likud and the Labor Party agreed to pass such a change, due to the opposition of the ultra-religious parties, the plan was put on ice.

The only fundamental changes introduced in the system of election towards the end of the term of the 12th Knesset were the raising of the qualifying threshold from one to one and a half percent (which blocked the way of several small lists into the 13th Knesset, and brought down the number of factions in the Knesset from 15 in the 12th Knesset to 10 in the 13th,) and the holding of direct elections for the Prime Minister simultaneously with the Knesset elections, as of the elections to the 14th Knesset. The main intention of the change was to change the balance of power between the Prime Minister on the one hand and the Knesset on the other, while diminishing the power of the latter so that it will no longer have the sole right to decide when new elections will take place, and will also have difficulties in bringing the government down by means of a vote of no-confidence.

On March 7, 2001, the Knesset voted to change the system of direct prime-ministerial elections and restore the one-vote parliamentary system of government that operated until 1996, going into effect with the elections to the 16th Knesset in January 2003.

Even though Israel does not yet have regional elections, as a result of the introduction of the system of primaries in some of the parties - a system which is still controversial and open to public debate - the number of Knesset Members representing the regions from which they come, has grown, and the phenomenon of localism in the Knesset has expanded. It is noteworthy that the Knesset today represents the heterogeneity of the Israeli population in a much fuller manner that in the past - a development which partially stems also from the primaries system. Nevertheless, there is still room for improvement, especially insofar as the representation of women (who are represented in the Knesset by 10 members only, even though women constitute over 50 percent of the population) and of the Arab population is concerned. 

The Knesset and the High Court of Justice

While one of the intentions of the amendment of the "Basic Law: the Government" was to bring about a change in the system of relations between the legislative and executive branches, more and more voices are being heard calling for a change also in the relations between the legislative and judiciary branches, and this as a result of what appears to be the ever-growing intervention of the High Court of Justice in the work of the Knesset. What is actually happening is that a growing number of Knesset Members and others are approaching the HCJ with appeals concerning Knesset decisions and its authorities. Red lights went on especially after the HCJ required the Knesset to hold a repeat vote on the matter of the lifting of the immunity of a Knesset Member. The repeat vote led to a reversal of the decision of the Knesset, and the immunity which was lifted in the first secret vote, was not lifted in the repeat vote. Many regarded this decision as an insupportable intervention by the HCJ in the decisions of the Knesset, and called for legislation which would curtail the powers of HCJ, and prevent in the future such intervention. This issue hasn't yet been resolved, but one may hope that an attempt will not be made to conspire against the HCJ by means of legislation, for this would undermine the foundations of our democratic system.