I think this has been misresolved. It should have stayed open or at worst resolved to 20%.

I will admit my understanding of the politics here is rudimentary, but I think both of the following are true.

'Reasonableness' is only one fifth of the proposed reforms.

It is considered the least controversial of the five, although it is still incredibly controversial.

Then the form of the question:

'Will the controversial reformS be passed?'

The question states reforms, plural, yet only one of them has passed. Moreover, the fact that it's 'the reforms' means that the most reasonable reading is that the question refers to all five passing.

I have no doubt that @BTE is NOT doing this for personal mana gain. And because this is a BTE question its a bit less surprising that it's been resolved; I think he(you) generally takes an expansive view over whether resolution criteria have been met. Just, in this case, far too expensive.

@CarmelHadar You bought this after I had already said it would resolve YES. My position has nothing to do with my decision. I have impaled myself on my own markets a bunch of times. I concede my resolution criteria was not detailed enough but your appeal is gonna be tough since you knew how it would resolve before you bought NO.

Are you contending that no controversial reform has passed?

@BTE no, but I do say that the"contraversial judicial reform under consideration" has not passed!

There Is a difference between "a judicial reform" and "the reform under consideration"

How can you say the reform has passed if they still discussing it right now?

To drill down into the details of what reforms will or won't pass, I've created markets for each of the four reforms that have not yet passed, with the deadline being the end of the current (25th) Knesset—a more natural deadline the the arbitrary one of year-end.

This criteria is very unclear.

What needs to be passed exactly?

It seems like a watered down version of the reform might pass. How will the market resolve in this case?

@BaryLevy That resolves YES because they are still no less controversial, if maybe less existentially dangerous.

@BTE The reforms had multiple pieces, and one of them passed. Does that resolve this YES or not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli_judicial_reform

1. Judicial selection — The committee which is responsible for recommending the appointment of judges currently comprises of serving judges, representatives of the Israel Bar Association, Knesset members and government Ministers, and is composed as such that agreement is required between these different groups. The proposed changes seek to change the composition of the committee, giving a majority of votes to the government and thus giving the government control over the selection and dismissal of all judges, including of the Supreme Court.

2. Judicial review — The proposed changes seek to curb judicial review over legislation, including by explicitly legislating against the Supreme Court's exercise of judicial review of Basic Laws, and requiring a full bench of Supreme Court justices to preside over any case in which the legality of regular legislation passed by the Knesset is evaluated, and 80% of them to rule for invalidation of such legislation.

3. Knesset override — The proposed changes seek to allow the Knesset to overrule a decision by the Supreme Court on the legality of legislation, where the Knesset votes with a majority (of 61, out of 120 Knesset members) against the court decision.

4. Legal advisers to government ministries — The proposed changes seek to reclassify ministry legal advisers from independent authorities, subject to the professional oversight of the Justice Ministry, to politically selected counsel whose opinions are explicitly non-binding upon the government and its ministers, thus allowing ministers to individually select and dismiss their legal advisors and decide whether or not to adhere to legal advice.

5. Reasonableness — The proposed changes seek to limit the scope of judicial review of governmental and administrative decisions, by legislating against the concept of 'reasonableness'. This would preclude the courts from hearing petitions or appeals against governmental and administrative decisions on the basis that such decisions are 'unreasonable'.

On 24 July 2023, the Knesset passed the law curbing reasonableness.[33]

@jack I think this should resolve YES since one of the components has passed the Knesset.

@BTE so, since reasonableness passed it should be resolved? that is ridiculous.
I dont think that you understand much about Israel politics .

I will appeal, if so. because that is not the definition of "passing a reform".
I understand that you have huge position here, but that is definitely not playing by the rules of this game.

Did this already happen essentially?

Only one of the reforms was passed; the least controversial of the lot. If the intent of this question is that it resolves YES if any piece of the reform passes, then yes, it happened, otherwise maybe wait until year end (and then maybe resolve to a percentage if this is the only part that ends up happening?)

A market which is more clear as to what the "reforms passing" means:

wait, what if there's a compromise? what if some reforms are passed and some or not? what if reforms are passed but the content of the reforms change?

@MichaelLatowicki there will 100% be some changes to the reforms when they pass so this is an exceptionally vague market

@ShaiNatapov in addition *some* judicial reforms will certainly pass, as there is bipartisan agreement that they are necessary and there is a stable coalition in the knessent that really wants them

@ShaiNatapov that's a reasonable prediction but we should know what the market creator is asking, it might be that the questions is easy in your opinion, in which case, good for you.

@MichaelLatowicki yea I agree completely, I was trying to strengthen your point because I don't know what the creator is asking either