Israel’s Parliament Approves a Key Part of Netanyahu’s Divisive Judicial Overhaul 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers a speech during the International Conference on Combating Antisemitism, in Jerusalem, 27 March 2025. (EPA)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers a speech during the International Conference on Combating Antisemitism, in Jerusalem, 27 March 2025. (EPA)
TT

Israel’s Parliament Approves a Key Part of Netanyahu’s Divisive Judicial Overhaul 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers a speech during the International Conference on Combating Antisemitism, in Jerusalem, 27 March 2025. (EPA)
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers a speech during the International Conference on Combating Antisemitism, in Jerusalem, 27 March 2025. (EPA)

Israel’s parliament on Thursday passed a key part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to overhaul the judiciary, angering critics who view it as a power grab by his far-right government.

The planned overhaul sparked mass demonstrations in 2023, leaving the country deeply divided before Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack that year which triggered the war in the Gaza Strip. The revival of the plans in recent weeks has added fuel to protests over Netanyahu's handling of the Gaza hostage crisis and his recent moves to fire or sideline top officials.

The law passed Thursday gives the government a larger role in appointing judges.

It would give another two of the nine seats on the Judicial Selection Committee to lawyers chosen by the government and the opposition. Those seats are currently held by the Israeli Bar Association. The political appointees would have the power to veto nominations to the Supreme Court and lower courts.

Supporters of the measure say it gives more power to elected officials. Netanyahu, who is on trial over corruption allegations, has long portrayed himself as the victim of a “deep state” made up of unelected officials, as well law enforcement and hostile media.

Critics say the changes would undermine an independent body that provides essential checks and balances. The law wouldn't take effect until the next Knesset, and the opposition has vowed to repeal it if it regains power.

Debate ran through the night before the bill was passed early Thursday. Most of Israel’s opposition boycotted the final vote, where the measure passed 67-1. They vowed immediately to repeal it, saying in a statement that the law “had one goal — to ensure that judges become subject to the will of politicians.”

Justice Minister Yariv Levin, the architect of the judicial overhaul, called it a “historic and necessary change” that would open the judicial system to “everyone, including those with a different agenda, including those from a different background.”

Petitions against the law have already been filed with the Supreme Court.

The law constitutes a dramatic change in the “basic structure” of parliamentary democracy in Israel, the Movement for Quality of Government said in its petition. Eliad Shraga, chair of the group, accused the government of “exploiting a time of war as a smokescreen to advance a political agenda.”

The law would shift the balance of the judicial committee toward political appointees, who would hold six seats instead of four. The government would appoint four and the opposition would appoint two.

A new mechanism for breaking deadlocks over appointments would result in more extreme candidates getting appointed, with much of the process devolving into political bargaining, said Amichai Cohen, a constitutional law professor and senior research fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute.

That would undermine the courts' ability to serve as a check on government power, he said, predicting that Levin would use the mechanism to appoint one of the far-right justices who helped him plan the overhaul.

“This has the potential to completely undermine the independence, the impartiality, the professionalism of the system,” he said, adding that judicial independence is especially important in Israel because the country has a relatively weak system of checks and balances.

Unlike in the United States, where Congress and the courts are designed to act as a check on the executive branch, Israel's government and parliamentary majority work in tandem, leaving the judiciary as the main counterbalance.

In the US, Congress has two houses that operate independently of the president and can limit his power. But in Israel, the prime minister and his majority coalition in parliament work in tandem. That leaves the judiciary to play a large role in checking executive power in the country.

Israel's government put the judicial overhaul on hold after the outbreak of the war in Gaza, and in January 2024, the Supreme Court shot down another key component that would have prevented judges from striking down some government decisions.

The effort regained momentum this month after Israel ended its ceasefire with Hamas and resumed its offensive. That helped solidify Netanyahu's governing coalition, which relies on far-right parties that want to continue the war. His government then cleared a major hurdle this week when it passed a budget, making it more likely that it will survive until the next planned election in October 2026.



UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
TT

UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

Britain's foreign minister Yvette Cooper ‌will meet with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday, after President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of London for ceding sovereignty of ​the Chagos Islands, which is home to a US-UK air base.
Last year, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer agreed a deal to transfer sovereignty of the Indian Ocean islands to Mauritius, while keeping control of one - Diego Garcia - through a 99-year lease that preserved US operations at the base, Reuters said.
Washington last year gave its blessing to the agreement, but Trump has since ‌changed his mind ‌several times. In January, Trump described it ​as ‌an ⁠act ​of "great stupidity", ⁠but earlier this month said he understood the deal was the best Starmer could make, before then renewing his criticism this week.
Cooper is meeting Rubio to discuss defense and security issues in Washington as Trump also toughens his rhetoric on Iran, saying Tehran must make a deal over its nuclear program in the ⁠next 10 to 15 days, or "really bad ‌things" will happen.
The Diego Garcia ‌base has recently been used for ​operations in the Middle East against ‌Yemen's Houthis and in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Although on Tuesday ‌Rubio's State Department said it backed the Chagos accord, the next day Trump said Britain was making a big mistake.
"DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA!" Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, saying the ‌base could be called upon in any future military operation to "eradicate a potential attack" from ⁠Iran.
Under the ⁠conditions for using the joint base, Britain would need to agree in advance to any operations out of Diego Garcia.
On Thursday, Britain's The Times newspaper reported that Trump's latest criticism of the Chagos deal came because Britain was yet to give permission to use the bases for future strikes against Iran, owing to concerns they may breach international law.
Asked about The Times report, Britain's Ministry of Defence said on Thursday it does not comment on operational matters and that Britain supported ​the ongoing political process between ​the US and Iran.


Turkish Police Detain Deutsche Welle Journalist over Social Media Posts

19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
TT

Turkish Police Detain Deutsche Welle Journalist over Social Media Posts

19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa

Turkish police have detained investigative journalist Alican Uludag on suspicion of insulting President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and spreading misinformation, sparking outrage among journalism groups.
Uludag, who works for German broadcaster Deutsche Welle’s Turkish service, was taken from his home in Ankara late Thursday as part of an investigation into social media posts. The Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office said he is suspected of “insulting the president” and “disseminating misleading information.”
The journalist, whose reporting focuses mainly on the judiciary and on corruption cases, was later transferred to Istanbul for questioning.
His detention drew sharp condemnation from press freedom advocates, who described it as an attack on media independence and democratic norms, The Associated Press said.
Deutsche Welle’s director‑general, Barbara Massing, demanded his release, calling the arrest “a deliberate act of intimidation.”
On Friday, journalists gathered outside Istanbul’s Çaglayan Courthouse to protest Uludag’s detention and to call for his immediate release.
The advocacy group, Reporters Without Borders considers Türkiye to be one of the most repressive countries for journalists, nothing that most media organizations are under government control and journalists face frequent legal pressure or intimidation.
At least 14 journalists or media sector workers are currently in prison, according to the Turkish Journalists Syndicate.


South Korea’s Ex-President Yoon Apologizes After Life Sentence Over Martial Law 

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol  delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
TT

South Korea’s Ex-President Yoon Apologizes After Life Sentence Over Martial Law 

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol  delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)

Former ‌South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol apologized on Friday for his short-lived declaration of martial law in December 2024, a day after a Seoul court sentenced him to life in prison for masterminding an insurrection.

In a statement released by his lawyers, Yoon said that while he was sorry for the "frustration and hardship" brought upon the people by his martial law decree, he stood behind the "sincerity and purpose" behind his actions.

The Seoul Central District Court's decision ‌to hand him ‌a life sentence on Thursday was "predetermined," he ‌said, ⁠adding that the verdict ⁠against him was political retaliation.

"Forces that seek to smear a decision made to save the nation as an 'insurrection' and to use it beyond political attacks as an opportunity to purge and eliminate their opponents will only grow more rampant going forward," he said.

Yoon also questioned ⁠whether an appeal would have meaning ‌in what he described as an ‌environment where judicial independence could not be guaranteed, while telling ‌supporters to "unite and rise."

His lawyers separately said the statement ‌did not amount to an intention to forgo an appeal.

Yoon's martial law declaration lasted around six hours before being voted down by parliament, but it sent shockwaves through the country and ‌sparked street protests.

The court found Yoon guilty of subverting constitutional order by deploying troops ⁠to storm ⁠parliament and move to detain opponents, capping a dramatic fall that saw him stripped of office and end up behind bars.

Yoon, a former career prosecutor, denied the charges, arguing he had presidential authority to declare martial law and his action was aimed at sounding the alarm over opposition parties' obstruction of government.

A special prosecutor had sought the death penalty for Yoon, though South Korea has not carried out an execution since 1997.

A prosecutor said on Thursday the team had some "regret" over the sentencing, but declined to say whether they planned to appeal.