Following a Passion for Sports to IsraelIn Israel, a new five month scholarship program being offered to young aspiring athletes – one of them could be you.
This past Sunday, Israel’s Supreme Court overturned a decision by Israel’s Central Election Committee to disqualify MK Haneen Zoabi of the Balad Party from running for a seat in the January 22 parliamentary elections. The court rejected the committee’s ruling that she should be banned based on her involvement in the Gaza flotilla of May 2010.
And therein lies an important tale.
Since it appears the decision is prompting calls for amending Israel’s Basic Law on elections, it is perhaps more important to focus on the fact that the court acted as it did than on the question of whether it was the committee or the court that correctly interpreted the law.
Briefly, earlier this month the elections committee had voted 19-9, with one abstention, to disqualify Ms. Zoabi based on its reading of the Basic Law, which in relevant part provides for the disqualification of a candidate “if the goals or actions of the person expressly or by implication, include one of the following: 1. Negation of the existence of the state of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state; 2. Incitement to racism; 3. Support for armed struggle by a hostile state or a terrorist organization against the state of Israel.
Certainly a strong argument could be made that Ms. Zoabi’s frequent condemnation of Israeli government policy pertaining to the Jewish essence of Israel, and her participation in the Gaza flotilla, comes within the provisions of numbers 1 and 3.
But the court nonetheless ruled as it did. Importantly, the ruling stands out in the context of all the recent talk about the Palestinian Authority’s intention to haul Israel before the International Criminal Court now that the PA has achieved recognition by the General Assembly as a non-member observer state. Yet jurisdiction of the ICC and other international tribunals is based on the failure of a state’s own court system to take up certain issues or its penchant for consistently ruling in favor of the state.
However, the ruling of Israel’s High Court in the Zoabi case demonstrates quite clearly that Israel’s court system is neither afraid to take on controversial issues nor reluctant to side with Arab interests against Jewish ones. Indeed, given the spate of rulings regarding ownership of properties in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, it can hardly be argued that Israel’s courts automatically reject Arab claims and favor Jewish ones.
We don’t care at all for this phenomenon, but it would be refreshing to sometimes hear things like this acknowledged by chronic critics of Israel. Perhaps they should think just a little about how a Jew would fare in any Arab court.
About the Author:


You must log in to post a comment.


How far the PA will go to present the lie as the truth and the truth as a lie? Its claim that Jesus was a Palestinian is old hat. But now the “resurrection” also refers to “the Palestinian state.”

The progressive consolidation imagines that organization can contain the messier side of man.

The Russian Yakhont missiles already delivered to Syria threaten Israel Navy ships carrying out vital missions in the Mediterranean.

Islamism represents the transformation of Islamic faith into a political ideology.
America could be said to be building a united front against Iran, but at what price?
The Japanese do not feel the need to apologize to Muslims for the negative way in which they relate to Islam.
Palestinian youths from Hebron, though, who met with Israelis near Bethlehem to share their problems and insights have been forced to issue a statement distancing themselves from the meeting.
Benghazi isn’t likely to keep Hillary out of the Democratic field in 2016, but after 2008, she is justifiably paranoid.
The contractors received the land at a bargain basement price, moved the prices up to 1.8 million NIS and pocketed one million NIS per apartment.
Many of my fellow college students are quick to voice their acceptance of their LGBT friends, but they turn up their noses and frown slightly when they speak of a Hasid.
The growing revelations that the Obama State Department watered down public statements on the attack in order to cleanse them of any mention of al Qaeda and terrorism is a travesty.
We must confront Islamist groups with what Prime Minister David Cameron referred to as “muscular liberalism.”
Al-Qaradawi’s visit and statements also serve as a reminder that the Israeli-Arab conflict is centered, more than ever, around religion.
Everyone who reads newspapers should know at least one thing. Threats to annihilate Israel have always been unremarkable. Almost never, it seems, have Israel’s existential enemies sought any reason for concealment.
Mark Treyger, a candidate for city council in New York City’s 47th council district, met recently with the editorial board of The Jewish Press at the newspaper’s Boro Park office.
Israel’s government did not want to liberate Jerusalem. Or to be more specific, the Labor and National Religious Party ministers did not want to liberate Jerusalem. “Who needs that whole Vatican?” Defense Minister Moshe Dayan explained at the time.
Two recent revelations have raised serious questions about the kind of government President Obama is running.
We were dismayed by the announcement last week from Google that it was changing the name “Palestinian Territories” to “Palestine” across its products. In explaining the action, a Google spokesman said that “We consult a number of sources and authorities when naming countries…. In this case, we are following the lead of the UN, ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and other international organizations.”
It seems clear that there is a lot more to the current developments regarding Syria than Israel’s bombing some sites there, though staunching the flow of Iranian weapons to Hizbullah through Syria is plainly a significant objective.
Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent embrace of the Arab Peace Initiative is, to say the least, unnerving. Certainly the response of Arab leaders to his action reflects the dangers for Israel inherent in the plan. President Obama seems to be preoccupied these days with Syria and Iran as well as serious domestic issues and is largely leaving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to Mr. Kerry. But the secretary of state seems poised to roil things up without any prospect of real progress.
Syria’s civil war is fast becoming one of the Obama administration’s greatest foreign policy challenges, for the moment even surpassing Iran’s march toward nuclear weaponry in its urgency. Together, both issues have effectively derailed the president’s long-range intention to focus on Asia and the emerging economic and military developments in China and other nations in the so-called Asian Pivot.
The investigation into the Boston bombings is still in its early stages but what seems to be emerging is that the presumed perpetrators were not directly linked to any foreign terrorist infrastructure. Rather, they were individual Americans radicalized by jihadist teachings and guided in their weapons-making by jihadist websites.
During the run-up to the confirmations of Secretary of State Kerry and Secretary of Defense Hagel, we and others forcefully challenged the latter over statements he had made about Iran and Israel, and were more favorably inclined toward the former.
This week Jews around the world celebrated Yom Ha’Atzmaut, Israel Independence Day. Sixty-five years ago on the day before the British mandate over Palestine was set to expire, the Jewish People’s Council, comprised of the political leadership of the Jewish residents of Palestine, proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel.
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/editorial/the-zoabi-decision/2013/01/03/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online:
No related posts.