The Supreme Court of Israel has decided to hear a case concerning the question of the existence of a mathematical formula in the Constitution of Israel, in which a majority of the judges of the Supreme Administrative Court, a branch of the Constitutional Court, disagreed with the majority opinion of the Chief Justice of Israel.
The Chief Justice’s opinion was based on a petition by the Constitutional Law Foundation, a legal organization representing the majority of Israeli Supreme Court judges, who argue that the term “supreme” is used by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to define military units in Israel.
The term is also used in the United States and other countries to designate military units within a country, such as the United Nations.
In a statement on its website, the Supreme Law Council said: “The court has decided that the use of the term ‘supreme’ in the term of the constitution, as used in Article 49 of the Constitution, constitutes a fundamental distortion of the definition of the constitutional power, a fundamental breach of the rule of law and an assault on democratic principles and democratic norms.
The court also concluded that the misuse of the word ‘supremacy’ as a generic term for the political entity of Israel constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights of the Israeli citizens.”
The court decided to accept the petition, which had been filed in 2016 by a number of Israeli civil society groups and civil society organizations, including the Constitutional Legal Foundation, and also a group of international organizations.
In an interview with The Jerusalem Times, a representative of the Legal Foundation said that the Chief of the Judicial Police, a member of the General Staff, had called for the appointment of a new judge in the case.
The Chief of Police, the Chief’s spokesperson said, is not appointed by the Chief, but is appointed by President Reuven Rivlin, who is also the Prime Minister of Israel and the president of the country.
The petitioners argued that the Supreme Command of the IDF, which oversees military operations, does not possess the power to appoint a judge, nor does it have the authority to appoint military units as part of the government.
The court said that it was clear that there is a distinction between a military unit in the government and a military entity in the state, and therefore the government can not be considered to be an entity in which the Chief has an obligation to take steps to resolve conflicts with a military organization, such an entity as a military court.
The judges of this Court have the same duties, obligations and responsibilities as other judges of an administrative court, the court said, and it is for them to interpret the law and issue rulings based on the legal authority of the law.