Israeli Supreme Court Accused of Betraying Equality by Disqualifying Arab Lawmaker

The Israeli Supreme Court has broken with tradition by disqualifying Sami Abu Shehadeh, chairman of the Balad party and former Knesset member, from running in elections. This year, the usual ritual of the political central elections committee disqualifying Arab candidates, only for the Supreme Court to reinstate them, was altered. Instead, the court's president informed Abu Shehadeh that a majority favored his disqualification, offering him the option to withdraw voluntarily to spare the judges the need to issue a controversial ruling.

The article argues that this decision, along with previous legislative actions like the 2016 impeachment law and the 2018 Nation-State Law, signifies a gradual erosion of democracy in Israel, favoring a "Jewish" character over a "democratic" one. These laws, upheld by the Supreme Court, have diminished the status of Arab citizens and marginalized liberal Jewish voices, turning Arab citizens into "guests in their own home."

The author contends that the Supreme Court's actions are a response to the government's pressure and a perceived threat to its own existence amid the ongoing judicial overhaul. By disqualifying Abu Shehadeh, the court is seen as appeasing the government with a familiar tactic: targeting the Arab public and its representatives. This is contrasted with past rulings, like the one in the Kafr Qasim case, where the court upheld the principle against illegal orders.

Furthermore, the article criticizes the Supreme Court's historical role in legitimizing the occupation of Palestinian territories, providing legal cover for policies of dispossession and mistreatment. The author claims the court maintained an illusion of dual standards, applying security considerations in the territories while upholding civil rights within Israel. This illusion, the article asserts, has now collapsed, with the same treatment previously reserved for Palestinians in the West Bank now being applied to Arab voters within Israel.

The piece concludes by likening the court's actions to a "betrayal of intellectuals," as described by Julien Benda, where judges have abandoned universal values for nationalistic sentiments. The author laments that the Supreme Court, once a symbol of equality under the law, has now joined the "mob," failing its fundamental purpose of protecting minorities from the tyranny of the majority. The article quotes former Knesset Speaker Avrum Burg, who states, "Forty-seven years later, there are no longer judges in Jerusalem."