Israeli MKs Resign From Parties But Retain Seats and Salaries Until Elections

A recent wave of resignations and new party formations among Israeli Knesset members has sparked public debate about the appropriateness of continuing to serve in the Knesset after leaving their original parties. Some MKs choose to resign from the Knesset to allow their replacements to enter, while others remain in office and continue receiving salaries until the upcoming elections. Additionally, some MKs have established new political parties during their current terms.

In the Yesh Atid party, several members including Boaz Toporovsky, Ron Katz, and Yoav Segalovich have resigned from both the party and the Knesset. Elazar Stern recently announced his departure from Yesh Atid and plans to resign from the Knesset as well. However, Yaron Levy, who left Yesh Atid months ago, continues to serve as an MK. Stern expressed gratitude to Yesh Atid and its leader Yair Lapid for providing a political home since 2015, during which he served in ministerial and committee roles.

Other MKs have taken new political paths but remain in the Knesset. Yuli Edelstein, originally elected on the Likud list and now co-founder of the new "Unity" party with Gilad Erdan, continues to serve. Similarly, Sharren Haskel, elected with the "National Camp" and founder of the "Israel First" party, also remains in office. Meanwhile, within Likud, Galit Distel Atbaryan, Eliyahu Revivo, and Tzaga Malko have announced they will not run in the upcoming primaries but will keep their Knesset seats until the elections. Revivo emphasized that politics was a means to a mission rather than an end, following months of internal party disputes.

The departure of Malko, who was placed 37th on the Likud list as a representative of the Ethiopian sector, leaves that community without Likud representation, a bloc estimated at about three mandates. Legally, leaving a party or deciding not to run again does not require an MK to resign from the Knesset. However, the recent resignations have intensified public discussion about whether MKs should retain their mandates after their political affiliation or intentions have changed. The debate also questions whether MKs who have decided not to seek re-election should serve until the end of the term or step aside to allow successors to gain parliamentary experience.