We have recently been told that placing a limitation on an individual's term in office is "not foreign to the parliamentary system," but in reality, there is no parliamentary democracy in which this system is practiced.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
The banality with which Israeli democracy is sacrificed on the altar of the position touted by media and intellectuals is inconceivable. Not only is this politically underhanded move not condemned, it is promoted and absurdly ruled on by non-democratic parties, in which the chairman' position is set for seven seats (Yesh Atid) or worse, where there is no mechanism to replace him (Yisrael Beytenu, Blue and White, Yamina, and New Hope). So what would such legislation actually really do?
First, it can breed political extortion and as a direct result – political instability.
While in a presidential regime the president receives his authority directly from the people, and the completion of his full term is almost guaranteed as it is separate from the elections to the legislature, in the parliamentary regime, the prime minister is a product of a coalition composition, represented by factions.
In this situation, when a prime minister's term has a clear expiration date, it will be in the interest of the coalition partners to burden his tenure, constantly threaten him with the dissolution of the government and extort the most they can in exchange for sustaining the government.
The result is political chaos. Short-lived governments, wide coalitions seeking to free themselves for hinging on one faction, less ideology, and much more political extortion and corruption.
Second, the more vulnerable a prime minister finds himself to political extortion, the more he will tend to favor non-democratic parties for his coalitions, those where lawmakers obey him without question.
This means that small fad parties will take the place of their larger, established democratic counterparts , with the former committed only to the ensuring the success of one man, who is not committed to serve the public and whose chanced of re-election are slim.
Third, this promotes the rule of bureaucrats and the further narrowing of the democratic playing field.
In a country where most bureaucrats are not replaced upon a change of government, limiting the prime minister's tenure while the entire public service system remains constant means very limited ability to promote new policy, even if its proponents won an absolute majority in the election.
This results in a dangerous combination of political blackmail, a collection of small, undemocratic ad-hoc parties, a shaky coalition and a prime minister devoid the public's support. Sound familiar?
We must beware a situation where the political accident of the Bennett government becomes the norm.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
