Festival of Disqualifications: The Most Unnecessary Political Show on the Way to the Ballot Box

An opinion article arguing that the period of disqualifications of candidates and lists ahead of the elections is an unnecessary political show. The writer explains that almost no disqualification holds up in the High Court of Justice, and that the petitions aim to generate momentary headlines and bring the anti-High Court discourse back to the center, instead of discussing substantive issues like international isolation or the Haaretz investigation. He calls on the public to stay silent and not echo the show.

An opinion piece by the director of the Center for Judaism and State at the Hartman Institute, describing the period of disqualifications of candidates and lists ahead of the Knesset elections as "the most unnecessary political show." The writer explains the legal mechanism: Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset allows disqualifying candidates who deny Israel's existence as a Jewish and democratic state, incite racism, or support armed struggle, but requires concrete evidence. He notes that history shows almost all disqualifications are overturned by the High Court of Justice, except for exceptional cases like Meir Kahane in 1988. As of the writing of the article, two petitions have been filed: one by Ben Gvir to disqualify Mansour Abbas and the Ra'am list, and one by "Metzadeck Le'Amiran" to disqualify Yoram Cohen. The writer argues that the purpose of the petitions is twofold: to generate momentary headlines, and to bring the anti-High Court discourse back to the center of public discourse instead of discussing substantive issues. He calls on the public to stay silent and not echo the show.