MK Kalner Demands Urgent Hearing Over Bar Association's Leniency Toward Terror Supporters
MK Ariel Kalner of the Likud party has called for an urgent discussion in the Knesset's National Security Committee regarding the conduct of the Israel Bar Association. In a letter to committee chairman MK Tzvika Fogel, Kalner accused the Bar Association of selective enforcement that favors lawyers supporting terrorism while harshly penalizing those aligned with the national camp. He cited recent decisions, including the two-year suspension of lawyer Asalah Abu Qdeir, who expressed joy over the October 7 attack and denied the atrocities committed that day, as evidence of leniency toward terror sympathizers.
Kalner further alleged that the Bar Association supports lawyers suspected of transmitting messages and instructions to imprisoned terrorists, contrasting this with the strict treatment of right-wing lawyers such as Odelya Kadmi, who faces disciplinary proceedings alongside lawyers Kineret Rashi and Zahava Gur. Kalner warned that this behavior undermines public trust in the judiciary and poses a serious threat to Israel’s national security by legitimizing or lightly punishing lawyers who identify with the enemy during wartime.
He urged the National Security Committee to convene a special session with all relevant parties to explore parliamentary and legislative measures to address the issue. The director of the human rights organization B’Tselem, Shay Glick, also criticized the Bar Association, calling it a refuge for terror supporters and condemning the temporary suspension of a lawyer who celebrated mass murder while right-wing lawyers face permanent expulsion threats.
In response, lawyer Odelya Kadmi dismissed the complaint filed by the Bar Association chairman to the ethics committee as politically motivated. She stated that no professional complaints were filed against lawyers, including those convicted of serious offenses, until she challenged the High Court of Justice. Kadmi vowed to continue fighting what she called baseless accusations, framing the dispute as a struggle for reform of the Bar Association and the rule of law rather than a personal battle.
