Yossi Schwartz ISL (RCIT section in Israel/Occupied Palestine) 03.10.2026
When Adolf Hitler took power in 1933, the German judiciary overwhelmingly capitulated to the Nazi regime. Rather than acting as a check on executive power, the majority of judges—including those on the Reichsgericht (the German Supreme Court)—willingly cooperated, actively integrating Nazi ideology into their legal rulings. Today, the supreme court judges in Israel support Ben Gvir.
Jacky Khoury, Palestinian correspondent for “Haaretz” wrote a courageous article today that rightly condemns the Supreme Court, which is collaborating with Ben Gvir and Tali Gottlieb against the Palestinian citizens of the State of Israel. Years ago, Supreme Court President Aharon Barak said at a conference of jurists in Eilat: “The role of the Supreme Court is to provide legal support for what the world sees as Israel’s war crimes.”
Jackie Khoury wrote:
“Knesset member Ahmad Tibi on Thursday called Knesset member Tali Gottlieb’s outbursts at a Supreme Court hearing regarding the disqualification of Balad Chairman Sami Abu Shehadeh. The interest expressed by the President of the Supreme Court, Justice Yitzhak Amit, was not surprising. The spectacle that was revealed to those present in the courtroom was surreal: Gottlieb and Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir preached to the Supreme Court justices about democracy and freedom of expression. It soon became clear that the justices themselves serve as a kind of “acoustic ceiling” that absorbs the noise made by representatives of Otzma Yehudit and silences the echoes of other voices. Amit suggested that Abu Shehadeh give up his candidacy. Most of the justices supported his disqualification, he said, so they suggested that he refrain from handing down the ruling.
Many words will be written about the legal significance of the proposal and the position of the judges. But as far as the Arab public is concerned, the importance of the discussion does not lie only in the matter of Abu Shehadeh and the article he published, or in the fate of the other Arab representatives that the Central Elections Committee sought to disqualify. In their view, the discussion defined the boundaries of freedom of expression and the political space within which Arab citizens can operate.
Abu Shehadeh said in a Supreme Court hearing yesterday: “This is an unjust and outrageous decision, but we will deal with it at the ballot box,” he said.
The campaigns, spins, and big (and especially small) moments of the election season
The clause that allows Abu Shehadeh to be disqualified could deal a fatal blow to democracy, said senior lawyer Mordechai Kemnitzer
Can the pressure exerted on him to withdraw his candidacy be justified? While Abu Shehadeh is facing disqualification, racist statements – from calls to drop an atomic bomb on the Gaza Strip to demands for the expulsion of Palestinians – do not hurt right-wing politicians. Sometimes they even strengthen them.
This discrepancy lies at the heart of the argument of the Adalah Legal Center, which represented Abu Shehadeh in the hearing. According to him, for the first time since Section 7A of the Knesset Basic Law was enacted in 1985, the Supreme Court acted to prevent the head of a party from running even though there was no legal basis for it. “None of the evidence presented against Abu Shehadeh includes a call for violence,” the statement said. Adalah added that an examination of Abu Shehadeh’s public and political activity over many years shows that he opposes violence and is committed to peace, justice and equality.”[i]
Endnotes:
[i] https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/elections/2026-10-02/ty-article/.premium/000001a0-fcc8-d5a8-afe2-fcdd0f870000