The Knesset Speaker denies political freedom to non-Jews but is still feted in Westminster

Yuli Edelstein is a member of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party as well as the Speaker of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset; he also happens to be addressing British MPs this evening. Edelstein is a hardliner; a proud settler whose daily life involves breaking international law. He is visiting Britain at the invitation of his opposite number, John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons.

Palestinian Ambassador Manuel Hassassian has described the visit as “incredulous”. His disbelief is no doubt compounded by the obvious contradiction in British parliamentarians welcoming a politician who not only breaks international law but also cocks a snook at official British government policy.

The Israeli Speaker lives in Neve Daniel, a settlement in the occupied West Bank. Like all Israeli settlements, it is illegal under international law, violating the Fourth Geneva Convention. Not content with displaying open contempt for the law, Edelstein also opposes Palestinian statehood, national rights and self-determination; he even has the audacity to dispute that Jerusalem, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights are occupied by Israel. He has also been very closely associated with right-wing extremists such as Im Tirzu, an organisation that recently tried to incite violence against Israeli and Palestinian human rights NGOs.

Furthermore, while Speaker Edelstein enjoys the stately welcome extended by members of the British parliament, let’s not forget that he vehemently opposes granting similar freedoms to members of his own legislature. He is one of the key proponents of the Suspension Bill, which is intended to prevent Arab members of the Knesset from attending parliament. Despite his supposedly neutral role as Speaker, he has sided with the hardliners.

The curtailing of freedom for members of parliament is a serious problem in many countries according to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU). “Members of parliament must be free to enjoy their human rights,” insists the IPU Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians. “If not, how can they defend and promote the rights of those who elected them?” The committee, which works in close cooperation with the UN, notes that vocal parliamentarians who question authoritarian governments all too often find themselves threatened.

Read: Knesset Speaker ‘proud to be a settler’ ahead of British Parliament address

This is a charge that is levelled frequently against Israel because of its ongoing effort to block the 20 per cent of its citizens who are Palestinians from participating in the electoral process. The tyranny of the Jewish Majority, it seems, extends to the inner sanctum of the so-called “only democracy in the Middle East”.

The Suspension Bill is a result of the domino effect of persecuting Arabs. It is the latest in a repertoire of tools used to undermine “Israeli-Arabs” and their political participation. Two years ago, the government raised Israel’s electoral threshold as a way to prevent the four small Arab political parties from entering the Knesset, a move that pushed the parties to run on a single slate as the “Joint List”. Three months ago, the Israeli government outlawed the northern branch of the Islamic Movement within Israel. Baseless criminal indictments have also been employed to harass Arab politicians who have participated in public protests. A Joint List member of the Knesset, Basel Ghattas, explained that the new law “will enable a Knesset majority of 90 members to remove an elected member on spurious allegations… such as support for terrorism.”

Last month, a complaint was sent to the IPU to examine the suspension of and political attacks against Arab Knesset Members (MKs). In a letter sent to IPU Secretary General Martin Chungong, the Joint List representatives Ayman Odeh and Dr Jamal Zahalka requested an examination of recent political attacks and sanctions imposed on three MKs: Zahalka himself, Haneen Zoabi and Ghattas. They pointed out that the Bill to suspend three of the members of the Balad Party followed their participation in a meeting with representatives of 10 Palestinian families from East Jerusalem whose deceased sons’ bodies had not been returned to them by the Israeli authorities for burial.

The Palestinian families in Jerusalem had asked the MKs for help; they obliged, viewing it as a purely humanitarian case. Muslim religious law and practices – like those of observant Jews – require that the bodies of deceased persons, even those who are viewed as enemies, must be buried without delay and in a respectful manner. Some of the bodies, according to the letter, had been withheld by Israel for over four months, something which clearly violates international law, the dignity of the deceased and his family, and Israeli Supreme Court precedents on such issues.

Immediately following the meeting the MKs in question contacted Gilad Erdan, Israel’s Minister of Public Security, to request the return of the bodies to the families. The minister stipulated a number of conditions for their return, including the payment of several thousand Israeli shekels as a guarantee that they will abide by the conditions. Despite the families’ agreement, the police still refused to release the bodies, without any explanation.

Despite the obvious humanitarian intent behind the MKs’ meeting and follow-up actions, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu exploited the incident in order to continue his longstanding campaign to de-legitimise Arab political leaders, particularly those from the Balad Party.

Netanyahu and other Jewish Israeli politicians, it is claimed, went to great lengths to falsify various details of the meeting in Jerusalem, giving the general public the impression that a simple humanitarian effort was, in fact, an action “in support of terrorism”. Formal complaints were then filed to the Knesset Ethics Committee against the MKs. Contrary to the rules of the committee, Netanyahu sent the full account of his complaint to the Israeli media. Instead of disqualifying the complaint for this shameful breach of the rules, Knesset Speaker Edelstein invited the general public to file complaints to the committee as well, resulting in a well-organised series of more than 400 near-identical letters.

On 8 February, following a hearing, the Ethics Committee decided to suspend the three Balad MKs, Zahalka for two months and four months each for Zoabi and Ghattas; they were banned from attending parliamentary meetings and committee hearings. Crucially, though, the committee conceded that the Jerusalem visit was legitimate and within the domain of their parliamentary work. Nevertheless, it concluded that the three MKs should be disciplined for standing up for a “moment of silence” during the meeting with the families, which is customary and done out of respect for the deceased, regardless of the circumstances of their death.

Members of the Joint List believe that the Ethics Committee was influenced greatly by the public atmosphere and the misleading and demonising comments made by Netanyahu and others; hence, they say, the disproportionate punishment.

Ben White: Israel and friends battle the boycott in Britain

In their defence, it is argued that the MKs were carrying out their legitimate, political duties as parliamentarians. The Joint List letter to the IPU pointed out that there is no channel for political representation between the Palestinian families and the state authorities, due to Israel’s undermining of Jerusalem’s local leadership and the negligence of the Palestinian Authority. The MKs, quite simply, stepped in to be that channel to defend the families’ rights. The List members also emphasised that for the MKs not to stand for a “moment of silence” would have been interpreted as gross disrespect to and by those present. That act, they said, has been twisted out of all proportion by Netanyahu and the Ethics Committee.

The letter to the IPU from the Joint List members went on to state that the suspension of the Balad MKs is the latest example of the government’s imputation of wrongdoing against the party since its establishment in the 1990s. The proposed legislation, they argued, is intended to limit the ability of Arab MKs to fulfil their parliamentary duties, some of which have been labelled opportunistically as “inappropriate behaviour”. The Arab politicians stressed that the current development is part of a wider campaign against the civil and political rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

The Joint List is the third largest party in the Knesset, and by silencing three of its politicians, the bloc’s influence and ability to operate in parliament has been curtailed. Their final request to the IPU Human Rights Committee was to open an inquiry without delay into the suspension and attacks on the Balad MKs.

Yuli Edelstein is supposed to be a democratic politician but he is part of the problem not the solution. As he addresses British MPs, will they ask him about the suspension of Arab parliamentarians and Israel’s anti-democratic laws? Will they also condemn Edelstein’s support for illegal settlements and his opposition to Palestinian national rights and self-determination? Will they at least, being mindful of Britain’s interest, make it quite clear that Edelstein’s brand of politics is a major obstacle to a just resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict? I hope so, but have my doubts.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.