Note: in this document, we shall treat laws and executive decisions as one. This is no coincidence, as laws and executive decisions are areas of government with no clear demarcation line, and were separated in representational government in order to create a balance of power and reduction of corruption, rather than due to any substantial differences between the two. Under Direct Democracy, the two are again united.

Checks and Balances
In order to ensure that public decisions are not in conflict with Basic Laws or with one another, The Supreme Court will be maintained under Direct Democracy as a balance to public authority, and will enjoy a power of veto over public decisions in case of such contradiction. The Supreme Court will remain devoid of executive and legislative power, and its power is thus limited.

Fundamentals of the System
Direct Democracy is based on a debate, voting and decision making system which is open to participation by all citizens. Under this system, the public may legislate and make decisions. This system is called the system of Public Government, and is the supreme sovereign in the state. Subordinate to it are all of the state’s executive organs. The police and other law-enforcement organs are, as ever, in charge of upholding the law.

How Will Public Debate and Decision Making Take Place?
At the beginning of the process, every citizen could propose an initiative. If enough citizens support the initiative, it is brought forward for public debate. All citizens may take part in this debate, which takes place in available information and media channels. The debate will also involve experts, who will present their opinions. During this phase, the initiative is processed and assumes its final form. Upon completion of the process, all citizens may vote for or against the proposal. Should the proposal be ratified, it then moves on to implementation. A legislative decision is noted in the law-code and forwarded to law-enforcement authorities; executive decisions are passed on to relevant officials for implementation.

Direct Democracy could be a layered system of government, and could also be used in local government. Local proposals without national implications will be discussed and voted upon at the local level. Each level of government determines the framework of authority for subordinate levels.

System Framework
At the head of the system is the public at large. From there, the public may overturn any decision taken at subordinate instances, as well as appointing and recalling any public servant for and from any office. The most important executive, legislative and judicial decisions are brought before the system of Public Government for ruling.

Maintaining a Subjugated System Model
Model A, based on maintaining existing authorities and subjugating them to the public will This model for the implementation of Direct Democracy requires minimal – but momentous – changes in the essence of existing organs of Government by Representatives. Its strong points are its simplicity and its likeness to the existing form of government. The model thus allows for an easy transition into Direct Democracy, in both theory and practice.
Under this model, the executive and legislative authorities are subjugated to the public, under a new Basic Law – the Law of Public Sovereignty – which cannot be changed by the legislative authority. The aforementioned authorities will continue with their present functions, and elections will be held to fill the various posts. Under the Law of Public Sovereignty, any initiative or law approved by the public will have to be observed by the authorities, and these authorities will not have the means to overturn such laws. The Supreme Court and the various law enforcement agencies will uphold this Basic Law, too. As mentioned above, the Supreme Court serves, under this model, as counterbalance to the public and may veto only such public decisions which are in contradiction with Basic Laws.

Example of Theoretical Model
In order to help the public make a decision about all these issues, including those which are too detailed or specific to interest a significant portion of the public, various committees shall be set up. These answer to the public and operate by law. As committees are made up of people and are small in size, they are in danger of corruption. This danger may be overcome by defining different models of procedure for these committees. For example, people in the committee may be replaced from time to time. In any case, the public has the right to appoint and recall people to and from these committees as it sees fit. The public may also raise the issue for discussion by a larger public, or make its own decisions.

National Initiative Committee
The role of this committee is to look at ideas for laws and decisions, and then to approve or deny them. One idea is to leave the Knesset to function as this committee. Of course, such a Knesset will be subject to the will of the public.

Local Initiative Committees
These committees will function much like their national counterparts, and will debate laws and decisions with purely local interest. Examples of this are municipality committees.

Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee
In the hostile environment in which we live, the public good requires that some issues are kept secret. In order to take care of such issues, the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee will function as a semi-secret organ. This committee will be made up of elected officials with security clearance. Members of the committee will carry out the public will in issues of foreign affairs and security, according to the mandate they have received from the public. The committee will be authorized to decide upon the tactics of its appointed mission, and to keep them secret.

Foreign Affairs and Defense Control Committee
This committee will comprise people with appropriate security clearance. Its job is to inform the public of misdoings, corruption and erroneous decisions in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, subject to the rulings of the Military Censorship. This committee will also be empowered to dismiss members from the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. The reason for this committee is the secrecy inherent to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, which prevents direct public control.

Emergencies Committee
This committee is expected to remain dormant most of the time. At times of national catastrophe or sudden war, it will wake into action and will take control of the country from the public for a limited period. Its job is to make snap decisions, and to return control to the public as soon as possible. At times of emergency, this committee becomes supreme sovereign in the state, including control over the various committees, but is still subject to the public will.

Supreme Judiciary Committee
This committee has two functions. The first is to receive petitions from individual citizens against laws or decisions made by the system at large. To a degree, this committee serves as protection for the citizens against a despotic majority, and will use its powers to settle such issues. The committee’s second function is to receive petitions about existing laws or decisions which are at cross-purposes, and to settle such issues by the means at its disposal. In order to facilitate the committee’s activity, funds and means that are not available to other committees will be made available to this one. For example, the committee may put to public vote proposed changes in laws, or may award compensation to individual citizens.

The Judiciary
The function of this organ is to judge people who have broken the law and to rule on civil cases. As in the courts today, the public may appoint and dismiss judges.

The Executive
The executive will not change much from its current form. The sole difference will allow the public to appoint and dismiss public servants at will.

Conclusion
All the details presented above are an amalgam of ideas intended to put the vision of Direct Democracy into motion. It therefore follows that these details are flexible, and subject to change by the public at large, as long as the principle of public sovereignty is upheld. The principle of public sovereignty will, in time, bring about changes and improvements in the afore-described model. Such changes will happen more quickly than in any other form of government known today, and will allow Direct Democracy to meet the challenges of government better than any other current system.