welcome to hardtalk. something extraordinary is happening in israel. military reservists security and politicians of different stripes of all joint a mass protest movement aimed at thwarting the netanyahu government to radically overall

israel's due to the source system. the critics say it threatens israel's democracy. occupying the west bank and raising questions over the strategic direction of netanyahu's orchard nationalist neta nyahu's orchard nationalist government. netanyahu's orchard nationalist government. my guess simcha rothman is an architect of those judicial reforms. rothman is an architect of thosejudicial reforms. it's israel plunging into chaos? simcha rothman in jerusalem, welcome simcha rothman injerusalem, welcome to hardtalk. simcha rothman in jerusalem, welcome to hardtalk.- simcha rothman in jerusalem, welcome to hardtalk. thank you for havin: welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. _ welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it _ welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it is _ welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it is a _ welcome to hardtalk. thank you for having me. it is a pleasure i for having me. it is a pleasure to have it _

for having me. it is a pleasure to have it the _ for having me. it is a pleasure to have it the show. _ for having me. it is a pleasure to have it the show. would . for having me. it is a pleasure to have it the show. would be j to have it the show. would be fair to say that you have been preparing for years for this opportunity that you have right now to impose your political will on the israeli judiciary? know. i do not think the right term is impose my will on the judiciary. i think it is vice versa. i'm trying to make israel thejudiciary, be more independent from the pressures it is currently having and more pointed in a way that is more democratic, like most other countries in the world that elect theirjudges through the democratic system and after theirjudges are elected or selected, they are dependent. that is where it works in most democratic countries around the world and that is the way it should work in israel and israel, we have a very strange system or thejudiciary system or the judiciary basically system or thejudiciary basically sub perpetuates in

itself and as a veto will get in an ever growing distance between the republican israel and the judges and between the republican israel and thejudges and it between the republican israel and the judges and it was not so bad when it was the situation in the uk when the court cannot cancel laws that were passed by the parliament saying that it's incompatible with some values we cannot cancel the laws and definitely it is used in other ways on the political system.— political system. you raise a lot of points _ political system. you raise a lot of points there _ political system. you raise a lot of points there but - political system. you raise a lot of points there but i - political system. you raise a l lot of points there but i guess to simplify, what you are saying is that you believe that the reforms boost the independence of the high court when it seems very clear majority of israelis disagree. your reform, the idea of simple majority can override a high court ruling in the fact that the politicians have much more power and appointing the judges in most israelis feel that

makes the court more dependent on the politicians, not more independent. i on the politicians, not more independent.— on the politicians, not more indeendent. ., �* ~ ., independent. i don't know where ou draw independent. i don't know where you draw the _ independent. i don't know where you draw the most _ independent. i don't know where you draw the most israelis - you draw the most israelis from. the vote in elections and voted for exactly those reforms and if they were well detailed before the elections in my party and by other parties in the coalition. it was very clear that the majority of the republic and israel voted. and it's clear that some people do not like it. but the same majority of the republican israel did not support and change the way we select our judges and other issues, i do not know where you draw this conclusion. we not know where you draw this conclusion.— conclusion. we draw it from oinion conclusion. we draw it from opinion poll— conclusion. we draw it from opinion poll services, - conclusion. we draw it from opinion poll services, idea l conclusion. we draw it from | opinion poll services, idea of the centre for public opinion and policy search survey which found two thirds of those

surveyed a poster proposals and interestingly, 44% of people who voted for the parties in netanyahu's coalition opposed neta nyahu's coalition opposed key netanyahu's coalition opposed key parts of your measures. fix, key parts of your measures. small problem, it is very much involved in working against and it is not an independent stop what you like the polls which support your side board approval comes out. i like the polls that were conducted with more than 4 million voters in the elected parties and key to the elected parties and key to the agenda before the election. i think that's the most reliable pull and not one done by me but the idea that is a player, the parties that supported his reforms were

promising get before the elections and they won a majority of the election and the democracy, that is fluid works, even if they do not like it. is works, even if they do not like it. , ., ~ ., works, even if they do not like it. , n ., , . works, even if they do not like it. is making a difference that hundreds of— it. is making a difference that hundreds of thousands - it. is making a difference that hundreds of thousands of - hundreds of thousands of israelis are never mind the poles of the right now but israelis are taking to the streets by the hundreds of thousands to express their disapproval in their opposition to thisjudicial reform? disapproval in their opposition to this judicial reform? does that not matter to you? fit that not matter to you? of course it — that not matter to you? of course it matters to me and demonstration as a part of a viable democracy. people can protest and that is their right and i should fight for this right and i will fight for this read to demonstrate and within the law, that is ok and i think that raises valid points. we talked to the leaders of the protests and people that openly talk about this issue, the

judicial reform is the smallest part of their concern. they are not going to the streets because ofjudicial reform, they're going to the streets because they don't like the facts and they should respect the words they say with the prime minister. he did not like the outcomes of the elections which is ok, people can protest the fact that they do not like the fact that they do not like the outcomes of the elections but it's not aboutjudicial reform, some of the more worried for religion —based legislation. some of it is real and most of it is fake, but the fears are definitely real and it's ourjob to prove ourselves and show that those fears are not true but the judicial reform, i think the smallest problem for the most of the protesters. problem for the most of the protesters-_ protesters. suiting that thousands _ protesters. suiting that thousands of _ protesters. suiting that | thousands of protesters protesters. suiting that - thousands of protesters are driven by political motivation and they are all leftists and

oppositions. i and they are all leftists and oppositions-_ oppositions. i did not say that. some _ oppositions. i did not say that. some of— oppositions. i did not say that. some of your - oppositions. i did not say - that. some of your colleagues have definitely _ that. some of your colleagues have definitely set _ that. some of your colleagues have definitely set it. - that. some of your colleagues have definitely set it. i - that. some of your colleagues have definitely set it. i did - have definitely set it. i did not use the _ have definitely set it. i did not use the word - have definitely set it. i did not use the word leftist, l have definitely set it. i did not use the word leftist, i | have definitely set it. i did i not use the word leftist, i did not use the word leftist, i did not even say political motivation, i talked about the worries that the protesters say that they have. when you listen to them and talk to them, they are worried about other issues and some of the more worried that thejudicial and some of the more worried that the judicial reforms that is true. but i think that is the minority of those protesting. protesting about other issues in the major concern is not thejudicial reform. it concern is not the 'udicial reform. . , concern is not the 'udicial reform. ., ., reform. it has the position of some the _ reform. it has the position of some the most _ reform. it has the position of some the most feared - some the most feared and apolitical institutions and figures and personalities in the country. figures and personalities in the country-— figures and personalities in the country.- like - figures and personalities in the country.- like all| figures and personalities in i the country.- like all the the country. like? like all the livin: the country. like? like all the living attorney _ the country. like? like all the living attorney generals - the country. like? like all the living attorney generals in - living attorney generals in israel today oppose your

measures.— israel today oppose your measures. ~ measures. so, you... a huge number— measures. so, you... a huge number four— measures. so, you... a huge number four of _ measures. so, you... a huge number four of the _ measures. so, you... a huge number four of the security l number four of the security agencies ofjoint statements from 400 of them, all of them opposing your measures- opposing your measures singh will be deeply _ opposing your measures singh will be deeply damaging - opposing your measures singh will be deeply damaging and dangerous for israeli democracy and these are some the most revered institutions in your country. revered institutions in your count . ., country. so, you say the legal advisers do — country. so, you say the legal advisers do not _ country. so, you say the legal advisers do not support - country. so, you say the legal advisers do not support the i advisers do not support the reforms that would take away the extra power from the legal advisers. it is interesting. i would pay? the legal advisers in israel have power like no other and i would say even public civil servant. i would say like the politicians. there is an article written and that is an article written and that is why he did not seem leftist

or right—wing because one of the leading professors is actually on the left in israel. there is no otherfigure actually on the left in israel. there is no other figure as powerful as the chief legal adviser is no more powerful than the president of the us, prime minister of the uk and all other together because he has the power basically to do whatever he wants to prevent the government from having the voice be heard in the court and it is therefore much needed and i would not be surprised if the chief legal adviser that held this amount of power over the years did not support taking away this power. if years did not support taking away this power.— years did not support taking away this power. if you're not ha - to away this power. if you're not happy to take _ away this power. if you're not happy to take the _ away this power. if you're not happy to take the witness - happy to take the witness statements of attorney generals does not think that's interesting to your case, how about the 400 senior officials from the israeli police force and. �* ., ., , ,

and. again, do you suggest the --eole, and. again, do you suggest the peeple. 400 — and. again, do you suggest the peeple. 400 is— and. again, do you suggest the people, 400 is a _ and. again, do you suggest the people, 400 is a large - and. again, do you suggest the people, 400 is a large number| people, 400 is a large number but the number of people that did not sign this paper from the same places are, but you know what, just to take an example from the past week, there was a paper presented with ideas on how to adjust the reform and how to make it as some consider compromise. that was presented by professor friedman and renounced expert and she was a justice minister in israel and the left—wing government, not a guy from the right and another professor again, not right—wing person and working. actually nominated ljy and working. actually nominated by that of the opposition to be in senior positions less than a year ago and former generals. are you telling me that you're

ready to compromise, given the scale of the pushback? i am 'ust scale of the pushback? i am just saying _ scale of the pushback? i am just saying that _ scale of the pushback? i am just saying that they - scale of the pushback? i —n just saying that they prepare the paper and after they presented the paper, it was leaked to the press and now, one of them are maybe all of them, one of them is caving under the published today and they get threats to take away they get threats to take away the signature with the violence because from their friends are pressure groups. the fact that people sign this and some parts of the elites in israel are being bullied and either objecting or not to say there supporting. objecting or not to say there supporting-_ supporting. i'm a little confused. _ supporting. i'm a little confused. are - supporting. i'm a little confused. are you - supporting. i'm a little i confused. are you saying supporting. i'm a little - confused. are you saying that men like the former idf chief of staff, are you saying that they are bullied to take the stand, the former head in

israel says that i do not want to become the mercenary of a dictator. that is a former rv chief saying that his criticism. we have —— army. they have refused to do their reserve training and protest at your proposal. reserve training and protest at your proposal-— your proposal. 0k, again, there are people _ your proposal. 0k, again, there are people who _ your proposal. 0k, again, there are people who see _ your proposal. 0k, again, there are people who see terrible - are people who see terrible stuff. some people that are former chiefs of staff in israel ran for prime minister positions in israel, lost to the netanyahu and will say anything that they can in order to demonise the government. this is not about demonisation.

just a second. the fact that he says so does that make it true. if you make about the substance and not do an ad hominem discussion of who said what, that we can do. if you want to say he says and she says and the experts support my view. i do not think that will bring us any closer to understanding the issues at hand. the any closer to understanding the issues at hand.— issues at hand. the reason why i'm interested _ issues at hand. the reason why i'm interested in _ issues at hand. the reason why i'm interested in who _ issues at hand. the reason why i'm interested in who is - issues at hand. the reason why i'm interested in who is four i i'm interested in who is four and opposes your position is because in the end, this is a political and judicial matter. you have worked in your effort to end would you call the judicial dictatorship in israel for years. you now have specific legislation and want to get through it. i wonder if it has made any difference to you to see the scale of the opposition in the protest movement has been supported by people and ijust name one more. netanyahu's closest ally who is as close to anyone as

netanyahu and to sit in the recent past, passing this reform in its current state will lead to disaster. again, if ou will lead to disaster. again, if you want _ will lead to disaster. again, if you want quotes, - will lead to disaster. again, if you want quotes, we - will lead to disaster. again, if you want quotes, we can | if you want quotes, we can quote people from either side. none of these people have given you pause for thought? i none of these people have given you pause for thought?— you pause for thought? i think that applying _ you pause for thought? i think that applying to _ you pause for thought? i think that applying to authority, - you pause for thought? i think that applying to authority, it l that applying to authority, it does not make a very good argument. if there are claims, i can talk about the claims. if there are, i say, it is bad because i said so, that is not a discussion that i'm capable of doing because i don't think it will make a good conversation. if you want, i can quote people who support and nobel prize winners. if you want, if it's ok, it is fine by you, nobel prize winner can hear on the first day and said that my reform is too subtle

and as to be more harsh and we should have nojudge in the judicial selection committee and nobel prize winner wrote renowned economist and in game theory, that is why he built theory, that is why he built the committee to electjudges. they wrote a very detailed description of comparative international law on many issues. if it is about name dropping who supports and who objects, i don't think it's so interesting but if you want, we can do this. i think it will be more interesting but it is up to you. more interesting but it is up to ou. . more interesting but it is up to ou. ~ ., ., ,, more interesting but it is up to ou. ., , to you. what will happen is if ou to you. what will happen is if you push _ to you. what will happen is if you push this _ to you. what will happen is if you push this legislation - to you. what will happen is if you push this legislation all. you push this legislation all the way through and the high court, as it still has the power to do, blocks it, stop

you will know, does not have the power to do it. it can still declare it unlawful. they cannot. that _ still declare it unlawful. they cannot. that is _ still declare it unlawful. they cannot. that is the _ still declare it unlawful. they cannot. that is the position, | cannot. that is the position, the legal adviser, i cannot even count how many times said ray specifically on behalf, right, left, former governments, this government, all of them said that the court does not have this power in israel and just like the supreme court in the us cannot cancel amendments to the constitution, just like the supreme court in the uk cannot cancel legislation.— cancel legislation. basic law in israel cancel legislation. basic law in israel is — cancel legislation. basic law in israel is not _ cancel legislation. basic law in israel is not a _ in israel is not a constitution. ~ ., �* constitution. what you're askinu constitution. what you're asking me _ constitution. what you're asking me now is what i constitution. what you're l asking me now is what will israel do if the supreme court will say, i am israel do if the supreme court will say, iam not israel do if the supreme court will say, i am not committed to

the law, that is a very good question. you should ask a person if the court can decide that the basic law in israel i was passed lawfully is unlawful and based on what? to ask this question, i think that's a good question, i think that's a good question to ask and to suggest that a court can act without a law. in that a court can act without a law. , ., ., , ., law. in your opinion, if the court tries _ law. in your opinion, if the court tries to _ law. in your opinion, if the court tries to use - law. in your opinion, if the court tries to use what - law. in your opinion, if the court tries to use what it l law. in your opinion, if the i court tries to use what it sees as its power to block this legislation, could it plunged israel into civil violence? i think that any and every situation that the army or police or any other security organisation does not get their orders from the elected officials of the country, that country stops being a democracy. that is the threat to democracy that i can talk about. but to say that the

democracy is a self—perpetuating self—selected court, deciding that the basic law that was passed lawfully does not bind him, that is not democracy, that does not rule of law, that is not a situation that i think will happen in israel connecting suggesting it means that you, the person asking this question, do not believe the courts in israel are obligated to the rule of law. i do not think that is the situation. if it is, we are much graver danger than any of the dangers you just mentioned. isn't the case that israel faces a twin challenge right now in your opinion, not only is there turmoil inside the country and there is turmoil, but we see intensifying the violence across the militarily occupied west bank. do you think israel is struggling to meet it? i

think israel is struggling to meet it? ., ., . meet it? i think i think that it's basically, _ meet it? i think i think that it's basically, there - meet it? i think i think that it's basically, there are - it's basically, there are ups and downs, but i think we are facing this challenge and the reason for that challenge is having nothing to do with what's happening in israel, but the reason is because the palestinian authority pays for terrorists that murdered dues, they paid an extra if you do more crimes with the two more people if they are citizens of israel did extra money for doing so in the fact that they're getting made to kill jewish people in their schools, that makes terror become constant. it is happening all the time.

constant. it is happening all the time-— the time. the spiral of violence _ the time. the spiral of violence is _ the time. the spiral ofj violence is intensifying the time. the spiral of i violence is intensifying in these 14 israelis killed since these 14 israelis killed since the beginning of the year and more than 70, more than 70 palestinians killed since the beginning of this year. in that context, do you think it is helpful, to seejewish settlers, hundreds of them rampaging through a palestinian village, burning properties, burning businesses to see the israeli military standing by doing nothing and then have the leader of your party tweet out things like this. the village needs to be wiped out. i think the state of israel needs to do that. is that helpful?- that. is that helpful? again, i think about, _ that. is that helpful? again, i think about, that's _ think about, that's not it

tweet by him, that's definitely not in english. but anyway, he explained what he said, he also apologised for any person who understood it the way you're trying to collect.— trying to collect. that's not howl trying to collect. that's not how i understood - trying to collect. that's not howl understood it, - trying to collect. that's not howl understood it, that's| trying to collect. that's not l howl understood it, that's of how i understood it, that's of the united states department understood it they called it disgusting and repugnant and they said that it was incitement to violence. ii they said that it was incitement to violence. if you want me _ incitement to violence. if you want me to — incitement to violence. if you want me to answer _ incitement to violence. if you | want me to answer questions, incitement to violence. if you i want me to answer questions, i think i can talk for more than ten seconds uninterrupted. i think this, what happened on that day was terrible. it was terrible when two innocent jewish people were murdered just because they were jewish people and two brothers. and did nothing to harm anyone. they were murdered. there was

terrible and that happened on the same day. it was also very troubling the also terrible that people hurt innocent people afterwards. but thank god no one died from that. and it wasn't justified. god no one died from that. and it wasn'tjustified. it god no one died from that. and it wasn't justified. it was terrible. but colouring situations when the palestinian authority that pays good money for its own budget will make it clear for its own budget will make it clea ., .,, ., for its own budget will make it clea ., ., ., clear were almost out of time. i made clear were almost out of time. i made this — clear were almost out of time. i made this point _ clear were almost out of time. i made this point already - clear were almost out of time. i made this point already and l i made this point already and despite the fact that this government entity that pays money to killjewish people, is still think someone tweeted and it was taken out of context, thatis it was taken out of context, that is the problem. in the main problem is the incitement and the terror in the

state—sponsored terror in the palestinian authority. i state-sponsored terror in the palestinian authority.- palestinian authority. i think ou ve palestinian authority. i think you very much _ palestinian authority. i think you very much for _ palestinian authority. i think you very much forjoining - palestinian authority. i think| you very much forjoining me palestinian authority. i think i you very much forjoining me on hardtalk. you very much for “oining me on hardtalk. ., ~ you very much for “oining me on monarch hello there. disruptive snowfall has been affecting central and southern scotland, parts of northern england, north wales and northern ireland, and further heavy snowfall likely to continue across northern england, north wales and north midlands as we head into friday morning. so some disruption, likely roads will be treacherous in those areas. the snow clears away, though,

fairly quickly from scotland. northern ireland early on friday and will slowly pull away from england and wales as well. but it will be a windy morning across england and wales, some drifting of that snow to eventually start to pull away into the north sea, allowing skies to brighten up for many plenty of sunshine. scotland, northern ireland. but further snow showers affecting northern and northeast scotland. a colder day to come across the board, including southern england with temperatures range of around two to seven celsius. then as we head through friday night, we're under a ridge of high pressure, light winds. an area of cold air will sit across the uk. so, temperatures will take a tumble as we head through friday nights. clearskies, light winds, further snow showers across northern scotland. but ice will become a problem, particularly where we've got all that lying snow. don't be surprised if we see —10 celsius across the snowfields of northern england and —15 or so across the snowfields of highlands and grampians. so here's the pressure chart for saturday. we're seeing this weather front working its way in to southern and western areas through the day, but ahead of it it'll be dry, clear and very cold. so, we start crisp and sunny for saturday before skies start to turn cloudy. as this weather front works its way into the west, could see some sleet and snow over the high ground

south west england, wales, northern ireland. it will be turning back to rain as milder air moves in. should see up to ten degrees there in plymouth by the end of the day, but it's a much colder further north and east, but at least dry until after dark. that weather front works its way across the country saturday night, preceded by some heavy snow across northern england and scotland for a while. but it reverts back to rain as milder air moves in behind it. so, a milder day for sunday. the rain clears away from the north east of scotland, some sunshine around. otherwise it's windy, quite a bit of cloud, more rain piling into southern and western areas. some of it will be heavy at times, but look at the temperatures, much milder across the board, up to 13 degrees in the south.

welcome to newsday, reporting live from singapore, i'm karishma vaswani. the headlines: several people are killed in germany, in a shooting at a jehovah's witnesses centre in hamburg. russian shelling temporarily cuts power at ukraine's largest nuclear energy facility — the un demands immediate action to avoid disaster. we are rolling a dice here and there will be a day when our luck will run out. the sushi train under threat as three people are arrested injapan during investigations into an unhygienic craze. and, we meet michelle yeoh, nominated for a best actress oscar for her performance in everything, everywhere,

all at once.