(VIDEO IN EXTENDED ARTICLE)

In the Supreme Court, the hearing on the petition to disqualify the participation of Michael Ben-Ari and Itamar Ben-Givir on the United Right-Wing parties’ election was held on Thursday. The petition was filed by the Reform Center, Tag Meir Forum, the Meretz faction, MK (Labor) Stav Shafir and 12 members of the Central Elections Committee.

The Attorney General and the State Attorney decided on Wednesday that in their opinion, Ben-Ari’s intervention should be disqualified and Ben-Givir approved. They expressed the same position before the Central Elections Committee, but the committee decided to approve the two candidates in a 16 to 15 vote.

The Director-General of the Reform Movement, Rabbi Gilad Kariv, claimed in the name of all the petitioners: “The Elections Committee did not give due consideration to the evidentiary basis that was placed before it,” Kariv said. I would like to emphasize the difference between our case and the Marzel affair. In Marzel’s case, he did not challenge the evidence presented, but claimed that he had changed his course and abandoned the racist path. This is also what the respondents claim in the response.”

At this stage, the president of the court intervened and stressed the difference between Ben-Ari and Ben-Givir. “Ben-Ari tries to interpret things,” she said. “But Ben-Givir says he changed his previous ways and today he is a lawyer who acts legally and submits petitions.” Kariv replied that “while Mr. Marzel said that the evidence does indeed tell who he was in the past, and today it is different, it does not appear from the minutes of the hearing not in Ben Givir’s case, and certainly not in the Ben-Ari case.”

He concluded that “this court recognized that the Elections Committee wears two hats – one political and one legal – hence it is clear that the committee is allowed to act both in light of political considerations and in the light of legal considerations. Political and not legal issues, when the unique coalition agreements, not to say strange, stand in the background and only reinforce the fact that in this specific discussion, the committee wore only its political hat.

Justice George Kara, and Israeli Arab, asked attorney Yitzchak Baum, “who decides who is loyal [concerning Israeli Arabs]? Does Ben-Ari decide?”

MK Shafir also wanted to say things, but Hayut refused. We will not turn into a platform for political propaganda. The position of the Attorney General was presented by attorney Aner Helman, chairman of the High Court of Justice’s Petitions Department in the State Prosecutor’s Office.

In the accompanying video, Smotrich speaks of fears of the High Court disqualifying the Otzma Yehudit party from running in the upcoming Knesset elections, insisting the party is legitimate and should be permitted to run.

The Central Election Committee earlier this month disqualified the Arab Balad party from running in the elections as reported, while Otzma Yisrael was given the green light, by a single vote, leading to the petitions to the High Court in the hope of ousting Ben-Ari and Ben-Givir from the election race.

(YWN Israel Desk – Jerusalem)