The coalition on Wednesday removed from the Knesset plenum’s agenda all legislation proposed by its members, due to an ongoing boycott by the haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties. The boycott is over the government’s delay in advancing a law that will likely exempt a majority of military-age haredi men from IDF service.
The plenum on Wednesday is usually dedicated to preliminary voting on bills by private MKs, and the removal of their bills means that no initiatives by coalition MKs will advance for the second straight week. The only bills to reach the plenum were those proposed by opposition MKs, or jointly by members of the coalition and opposition.
Haredi parties demand gov't make advancements on IDF service law
Sources in haredi parties told The Jerusalem Post this week that their demand is for the government to make a “significant advancement” on the IDF service law before they resume voting in favor of other coalition bills. They did not define exactly what the “significant advancement” entailed.
In the meantime, Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee (FADC) chairman MK Yuli Edelstein has indicated that he will propose a version of the bill that will include higher than expected draft quotas for haredim. This would likely be unacceptable to haredi politicians.
The bill is currently being formulated by the FADC’s legal team, and it is unclear when it will be presented. The FADC’s schedule for next week did not include meetings on the haredi draft bill.
The IDF on Tuesday launched a draft-dodger entrapment operation, which included 36 arrests. According to a series of reports, haredi politicians responded by threatening to leave the government if a single yeshiva student was arrested.
In the meanwhile, some opposition MKs criticized the operation for not being stringent enough. Yisrael Beytenu MK Sharon Nir, a member of the FADC, called it a “sham,” since only one out of the 36 had a haredi background. Nir penned a letter to Defense Minister Yisrael Katz and IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir demanding they explain what she claimed was “selective enforcement” of draft orders.