Israel’s Central Elections Committee voted to disqualify Arab-majority parties and two candidates from the upcoming October 27 election, setting up a high-stakes Supreme Court review.
Central Elections Committee Votes to Bar Arab Parties and Candidates
Israel’s Central Elections Committee voted to bar Arab-majority parties and two individual candidates from next month’s general election according to regional reporting. The sweeping committee decisions target the United Arab List, known as Ra’am, alongside candidates Ofer Cassif and Sami Abu Shehadeh.
Ten disqualification requests in total were filed against parties and candidates across the political spectrum, touching organizations from across the political landscape as documented in election filings.
The Legal Battle Over Sami Abu Shehadeh and the October 8 Article
The most prominent individual challenge centers on Balad chairman Sami Abu Shehadeh, whom far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir petitioned to disqualify from running for the 26th Knesset. The petition focuses heavily on an article Abu Shehadeh published on October 8, 2023, just one day after the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.
In that article, Abu Shehadeh characterized the events as an important historical event from a military, political and strategic perspective
. Petitioners and allied political factions argue that such language constitutes support for an armed struggle against Israel by a terrorist organization, which serves as a legal ground for exclusion under Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset.
Under Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset, a party list or candidate can be barred for supporting an armed struggle by an enemy state or terrorist organization against Israel.
Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and State Attorney Amit Eisman informed the Elections Committee that the October 8 article raised serious concerns regarding potential support for terrorism. However, the state prosecutors stopped short of formally recommending a disqualification, pointing to the stringent legal standard established by the Supreme Court.
Mansour Abbas Defends Ra’am and Navigates Israel’s Jewish Identity
Ra’am faces three separate disqualification petitions filed by Otzma Yehudit, Likud, and the Choosing Life Forum representing families affected by terrorism. The petitioners allege that the Islamist party fails to accept Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and maintains links amounting to support for armed struggle.
Amid the electoral pressure, Ra’am chairman Mansour Abbas addressed his community via an Arabic-language social media post, explaining that Arab political parties accepted Israel’s character as a practical necessity to prevent total exclusion from the political system.
“The Jewishness of the state is an existing reality that was imposed on us and was not something we chose. It is the choice of the Jewish majority and not our demand.”
Mansour Abbas, Ra’am Chairman, via The Yeshiva World
Abbas emphasized that his pragmatic approach does not abandon the Palestinian narrative, pushing instead for a strategy of partnership and influence
aimed at improving civil rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel. Palestinian citizens make up roughly 20% of the country’s population, descending largely from those who remained after 1948 when Israel was established.
Supreme Court Review and the Precedent of Overturning Election Bans
None of the Central Elections Committee decisions are final. Under Israeli law, any candidate or party disqualification voted on by the committee must be reviewed and approved by the Supreme Court. Historical precedent suggests the committee’s bans face a steep judicial hurdle.
The Supreme Court has historically interpreted Section 7A grounds narrowly, requiring clear and persuasive evidence before stripping a party or candidate of their right to run for office. Legal rights groups representing the affected politicians, including Adalah, maintain there is no legal basis for the exclusions.
As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to remain in power in a closely contested race ahead of the October 27 vote, the legal battles carry immense weight. While right-wing factions push to sideline their political rivals, the ultimate decision rests with justices who have repeatedly overturned similar election panel rulings in previous cycles.