Balad leader Sami Abu Shehadeh drops Knesset bid after High Court hearing

Sami Abu Shehadeh, chair of the Arab nationalist party Balad, has withdrawn his candidacy in Israel's October 27 parliamentary election, ending a legal fight over his disqualification. The Times of Israel reported that at a hearing on October 1, 2026, the justices told him unanimously that he should step aside, and informed him that most of the nine-justice panel would uphold the ban on his running.

Balad later confirmed the move formally. According to a statement relayed by journalist Mohammad Majadla on N12's news channel, Abu Shehadeh will remain at the head of the party. The statement said he "did not retract his positions" and did not run from the struggle, and added: "This is not the end of the road, this is a new stage."

Why he was disqualified

The case concerns an article Abu Shehadeh published on the day after the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. Israel's Central Elections Committee, the body that runs national elections and rules in the first instance on whether lists and candidates may stand, voted last month to bar him. The Times of Israel described the committee as controlled by the governing coalition, but noted that the vote drew support from across the political spectrum. The attorney general argued that the article amounted to support for armed struggle against Israel, and Ynet reported that it had been characterised as support for terrorism.

Decisions of this kind go to the Supreme Court, which also sits as the High Court of Justice, for review. At the hearing, The Times of Israel reported, Abu Shehadeh voiced regret over the article and said he did not back armed struggle. Ynet described the court's recommendation as advice from the court's president, and News.co.il reported that he had accepted the proposal of Justice Yitzhak Amit.

How the decision was reached

Balad runs within the Joint List, an alliance of Arab parties, and the decision unfolded over several hours. Earlier in the day the Joint List issued a sharply worded statement, carried by Abu Ali Express, accusing the Supreme Court of adopting "one law for Jews and another for Arabs" and of siding with what it called a campaign led by National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. Commentator Amit Segal read that statement as a rejection, for the time being, of the proposal that Abu Shehadeh withdraw.

Majadla, meanwhile, publicly urged Balad to accept the court's recommendation. In comments posted by Abu Ali Express, he argued that pressing on to a formal ruling could expose Abu Shehadeh to legal proceedings and leave the party itself open to disqualification in future. Later in the evening, Majadla reported that Balad had decided to accept the judges' advice.

Haaretz, citing a senior Balad source, reported that Abu Shehadeh decided to step down following an overnight party meeting. That account of the timing sits awkwardly with reports from the same day of continued debate within the Joint List into the evening, and the reports do not reconcile the two.

Reactions

According to a Ynet alert, Balad said the episode raised questions about the limits of political legitimacy for Arab citizens of Israel. Ben Gvir, who campaigned for the disqualification, said in a statement reported by News.co.il that it was regrettable the court had let Abu Shehadeh withdraw without issuing a ruling on the ban.

Some right-leaning commentators criticised the court for avoiding a verdict. Segal argued that Justice Amit had previously written a ruling allowing Arab lawmaker Heba Yazbak to run despite statements praising militants, and that under the court's own precedents there was no real basis to bar Abu Shehadeh; he attributed the court's approach to public pressure. A News.co.il post said the option of withdrawing had not been offered to Michael Ben Ari, a far-right politician whose candidacy the court once barred. These are opinions, not findings of the court.

What the reports do not say

None of the reports quote the text of the article at the centre of the case, or describe precisely what in it the attorney general found to constitute support for armed struggle. Because no ruling was issued, it is not known which justices, if any, would have allowed Abu Shehadeh to run, or on what reasoning. The reports do not say who will replace him on the Joint List's slate, whether the withdrawal has any effect on the Central Elections Committee's decision as a legal record, or whether the legal proceedings Majadla warned of are being considered by any authority.