A Tale of Strength and Weakness: The Parliamentary Committee System in Israel

The Israeli parliamentary committee system is an interesting case study. In its legislative role it demonstrates impressive strength, while in its oversight function it demonstrates weakness and inefficiency. Empirical evidences show that in most cases committee systems are either weak in both functions or strong in both. The committee system in the Irish Parliament is an example of a weakness both in legislation and in legislative oversight of the bureaucracy, while the permanent committees of the German Bundestag show strong legislation powers alongside efficient oversight capabilities. Israel does not fit this model: an historical examination of the committee system in the Knesset since the seventies shows that it was always strong regarding legislation but as time passed it became weaker regarding oversight. What makes the Israeli system so diverse, and what can we learn from it? The answers to these questions will help us to understand not only the Israeli case study, but more importantly it will allow us to develop a framework which can help predict when a committee system has the potential to act effectively, and in what role. The framework I develop, based on both an in-depth analysis of the Israeli case and on comparative examinations of other parliamentary committee systems, will comprise a number of essential conditions: institutional, structural, political and procedural. As many of these conditions that are fulfilled in any given parliamentary committee system, its ability to act effectively both in the legislation and in the oversight roles will be higher. The ability, or the potential, for committees to be strong in both of their main functions can thus be structurally assessed, however the actual implementation of these potential powers varies, and this is where we see the divergence between those committees that are strong in one role but weak in another.