Israel's Defending Democracy: Oct 7th Alters Election Disqualification Rules
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Israel's Supreme Court has disqualified electoral lists for denying the state's existence or inciting racism.
- The Knesset granted the Elections Committee power to disqualify lists in 1985 after Meir Kahane's election.
- The October 7th attacks have reportedly shifted the court's consensus on disqualifications.
- Sami Abu Shehadeh was disqualified, an unusual move based on a single instance.
- The author prefers criminal prosecution over judicial elite decisions on candidate eligibility.
The Israeli Supreme Court's authority to disqualify electoral lists has evolved significantly since the state's inception, particularly in response to perceived threats to its Jewish and democratic character. The first instance of a list being disqualified occurred in 1965 when the Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of the Socialist list, identified with Al-Ard, for denying Israel's existence. This decision preceded specific legislation, drawing on post-WWII German legal concepts.
The Knesset later amended the Basic Law: The Knesset in 1985, granting the Central Elections Committee the explicit power to disqualify lists that deny the state's Jewish and democratic nature or incite racism. This followed the election of Meir Kahane to the Knesset and his promotion of racist legislation. Consequently, in 1988, the Supreme Court approved the disqualification of the "Kach" list, though it did not disqualify the Progressive for Peace list, despite its ideological lineage to Al-Ard.
The court continued to permit the disqualification of racist lists, approving the exclusion of "Kach" and "Kahane Chai" in 1992. It also disqualified the Moledet-Gesher-Tzomet list in a local election in 1992 due to a racist campaign against the Arab population.
The article notes that the October 7th events have created a new consensus within the court, leading to a majority decision to disqualify Sami Abu Shehadeh. This is considered unusual, as typically a pattern of problematic statements or publications is required for disqualification, not a single instance. The author suggests that disqualifying a candidate based on a single publication would necessitate a change or development in existing legal doctrine.
From a democratic perspective, the author expresses a preference for criminal prosecution of Knesset candidates for racist or terror-supporting statements, rather than empowering a judicial elite to decide who can run for office. The article implies that the events of October 7th have fundamentally shifted the legal and political landscape regarding election disqualifications in Israel.
Read the original at MaarivMentioned
