The criteria under which a person or party can be disqualified from running in elections are laid out in Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset. These include denying the state's Jewish and democratic character, inciting racism, or supporting the armed struggle of an enemy state or terrorist organization. Over the years, the Supreme Court has narrowly interpreted this section to allow for the broadest possible spectrum of candidates and parties to run and be elected. Now, however, MK Ofir Katz has proposed a bill seeking to expand the grounds for barring political parties from elections and to limit judicial review of decisions to disqualify individuals or parties from running in elections.
The Association for Civil Rights strongly opposes this bill. In a memorandum sent to Knesset members (Heb), Attorney Gil Gan-Mor, ACRI’s Director of the Civil and Social Rights Department, emphasized our belief that the entire process for disqualifying candidates and parties established in Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset should be repealed, since it has evolved from a system intended to be used to defend democracy during highly unusual circumstances into a means of disrupting the democratic system and manipulating elections. The reality is that Section 7A fails to prevent the election of extremists who seek to undermine democracy; it is a law that is ultimately useless in protecting democracy, while the damage it causes is vast.
Analysis of the proposal shows that its ultimate purpose is to disqualify Arab parties and Arab candidates. It is the legal expression of an aspiration voiced by coalition members for a "Knesset without Arabs," or at the very least to force Arab and left-wing MKs to silence themselves and avoid expressing opinions on the occupation and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This also infringes on their rights as elected officials to fully represent their voters.
The Supreme Court has previously ruled that to conclude that a candidate denies the state's character, incites racism, or supports the armed struggle of an enemy state or terrorist organization requires a significant amount of evidence, not just sporadic statements. The proposal seeks to bypass this ruling by lowering the threshold of evidence required for disqualification, but only on the grounds of supporting terrorism. Practically, this means that disqualification on the basis of support for armed struggle would be established based on occasional pronouncements. Additionally, while the law currently restricts disqualification on the grounds of supporting armed struggle of a state or terrorist organization, the proposal seeks to expand these grounds to include support for lone attackers or those seeking to harm to Israeli citizens.
However, all this being said, support for Jewish terrorists or Jewish terrorist organizations would not be grounds for disqualification. If the proposal's goal was genuinely to prevent the election of terrorism supporters it would apply to all types of terrorism, whether against Israelis or Palestinians.
Currently, a decision by the Elections Committee, a political entity, to disqualify a candidate or party requires the approval of the Supreme Court. The proposal seeks to make the Elections Committee's decision final, while the Supreme Court would serve only as an appeals court. The Elections Committee is a political, non-neutral body motivated by political interests. If anything, disqualification decisions should be made only by neutral parties.
If this proposal passes, it could result in a situation in which the Knesset majority prevents its smaller political opponents, especially Arab parties, from running for Knesset. This would go against a core principle of democracy—holding free and equal elections—and would also solidify right-wing rule. Though this may be the desired outcome of the bill's proponents, anyone who values democracy must oppose it.