Grok says:
Key Points
Research suggests there is no country where judges have more power than in Israel, given the Israeli Supreme Court's extensive authority.
It seems likely that the United States and South Africa have comparable judicial power, but not exceeding Israel's, due to similar abilities to strike down laws and influence policy.
The evidence leans toward Israel's judges having significant influence, especially in appointments and judicial review, with no clear example of greater power elsewhere.
An unexpected detail is that in some countries like the US, judges have lifetime appointments, potentially offering more long-term influence than Israel's age-70 retirement.
Direct Answer
Israel's judges, particularly those in the Supreme Court, hold substantial power, including the ability to strike down laws and influence government decisions, as seen in recent controversies over judicial reforms Israel's Supreme Court strikes down disputed law. After thorough research, it appears there is no country where judges have more power than in Israel, given the court's role as a key check on government actions without a formal constitution, relying on Basic Laws. The United States and South Africa have strong judicial systems, with supreme courts that can also invalidate laws, but their powers seem comparable rather than exceeding Israel's. For example, the US Supreme Court has lifetime appointments, which might offer more long-term influence, but Israel's judges have significant control over appointments through the Judicial Selection Committee, giving them a unique edge Judicial Selection | Judiciaries Worldwide. Similarly, South Africa's Constitutional Court plays a vital role in post-apartheid legal reforms, but its scope aligns with Israel's in protecting constitutional principles Judicial review in South Africa. This comparison is complex, as "power" can mean different things, like tenure, appointment influence, or law-striking ability. No country clearly surpasses Israel, but the US's lifetime judicial tenure is an interesting contrast to Israel's age-70 retirement, potentially affecting long-term impact.
Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of Judicial Power in Israel Compared to Other Countries
This note provides a comprehensive analysis of whether there is any country where judges have more power than in Israel, focusing on the scope, influence, and mechanisms of judicial authority. It draws on data from legal systems worldwide, including the United States, South Africa, Singapore, and others, with a focus on the most recent information available as of March 2025. The analysis considers aspects such as judicial review, appointment processes, tenure, and the ability to influence policy, acknowledging the complexity of comparing judicial power across different constitutional frameworks.
Background and Methodology
Judicial power refers to the authority of judges, particularly those in supreme or constitutional courts, to interpret laws, strike down legislation, oversee government actions, and influence the legal and political landscape. In Israel, the Supreme Court has been noted for its extensive powers, including the ability to review and invalidate laws based on the Basic Laws, which serve as a quasi-constitution. The inquiry seeks to identify if any country's judiciary exceeds this in scope or influence, using sources like Wikipedia, judicial organization websites, and comparative legal studies. Data is primarily from 2023-2025, reflecting recent developments, including Israel's judicial reform debates.
Judicial Power in Israel
Israel's judicial system is headed by the Supreme Court, which has both appellate and original jurisdiction, particularly as the High Court of Justice (Bagatz). It can hear cases challenging government decisions and has struck down laws, such as the 2023 reasonableness law, in a historic 8-7 decision on January 1, 2024 Israel's Supreme Court strikes down disputed law. The court's power is notable given Israel's lack of a formal written constitution, relying on Basic Laws, which it can review for constitutionality. Judges serve until age 70, as per Supreme Court of Israel, and have significant influence through the Judicial Selection Committee, composed of three Supreme Court judges, two ministers, two Knesset members, and two Bar Association representatives, giving the judiciary a strong say in appointments Judicial Selection Committee (Israel). Recent controversies, such as the 2023 judicial reform proposed by Yariv Levin, aimed to limit these powers, highlighting their extent, with protests and international concern over democratic backsliding Israel judicial reform explained. The court's ability to act as a check on government, especially in a system without bicameral legislature or federalism, underscores its influence. Comparative Analysis with Other Countries
To determine if any country has judges with more power, we examine several dimensions: judicial review, appointment processes, tenure, and additional powers like issuing advisory opinions or initiating cases.
United States
The US Supreme Court has significant power, established by Marbury v. Madison (1803), to strike down laws unconstitutional under the Constitution About the Supreme Court. It hears appeals and has original jurisdiction in cases like state disputes, with lifetime appointments for justices, potentially offering more long-term influence than Israel's age-70 retirement. However, the appointment process involves presidential nomination and Senate confirmation, with no direct judicial input, unlike Israel's committee The Executive Role in the Appointment of Federal Judges. The US court's power is comparable in striking laws, but its lack of control over appointments suggests less influence in that area. South Africa
South Africa's Constitutional Court, established post-apartheid, is the highest court for constitutional matters, with broad powers to protect the Constitution Role of the Constitutional Court. It can strike down laws and has original jurisdiction in certain cases, similar to Israel's High Court of Justice. Judges are appointed by the President after consulting the Judicial Service Commission, with a focus on reflecting racial and gender diversity The SA Constitution. Tenure is until age 70 or resignation, aligning with Israel, but the court's role in shaping post-apartheid legal reforms is significant, though not exceeding Israel's in scope Judicial review in South Africa. Singapore
Singapore's Supreme Court, comprising the High Court and Court of Appeal, has strong powers, with the Chief Justice leading an independent judiciary Judicial system of Singapore. It can review laws and government actions, but concerns exist about perceived ties to the ruling party, especially in politically sensitive cases Judicial independence in Singapore. Judges are appointed by the President on Cabinet advice, with no direct judicial input, contrasting with Israel's system. Its power seems less extensive in influencing policy compared to Israel's active role in government oversight. Other Countries and Dimensions
Germany: The Federal Constitutional Court can strike down laws violating the Basic Law, with judges appointed by a mix of executive and legislative bodies, serving 12-year terms Judicial appointments in India and other countries. This limited tenure contrasts with Israel's and the US's, suggesting less long-term influence. Canada: The Supreme Court can declare laws unconstitutional, with appointments by the Prime Minister and Governor General, serving until age 75 Judicial Selection | Judiciaries Worldwide. Its power is comparable, but without Israel's direct appointment influence. Appointment Processes: In Italy, the Constitutional Court includes five jurists appointed by the judiciary, five by parliament, and five by the president, sharing power with other branches, unlike Israel's stronger judicial role Judicial Selection | Judiciaries Worldwide. This suggests Israel's judges have more control over appointments.
Factors Influencing Comparative Power
Several factors affect perceived judicial power:
Comparative Analysis Table
Below is a table summarizing key aspects for selected countries:
| | | |
|---|
| Can strike down laws, active in oversight | Judicial Selection Committee, strong judicial input | Until age 70, significant influence |
| Can strike down laws, lifetime influence | Presidential nomination, Senate confirmation | Lifetime, no direct judicial input |
| Strong constitutional review, post-apartheid role | President after JSC consultation, diversity focus | Until age 70, comparable to Israel |
| Reviews laws, concerns over ruling party ties | President on Cabinet advice, no judicial input | Until age 65, less appointment influence |
Conclusion
Research suggests there is no country where judges have more power than in Israel, given the Supreme Court's extensive authority in judicial review, government oversight, and appointment influence. The United States and South Africa have comparable powers, with the US's lifetime tenure offering potential long-term influence, an unexpected detail compared to Israel's age-70 retirement. Singapore and other countries show strong judiciaries, but none exceed Israel's in overall power, particularly in the context of its constitutional framework and active role in policy. This analysis, up to March 2025, reflects the complexity of comparing judicial systems, with no clear example surpassing Israel's.
Key Citations
