字号 ·· | 护眼
半岛电视台

以色列禁止阿拉伯政党参加选举:它们是谁,为何重要Israel bans Arab parties from election: Who they are, why it matters

点「原文对照」整页切到原文,或双击某段只看那段的原文。

以色列中央选举委员会已投票决定,禁止该国两个主要的阿拉伯裔政党名单参加下个月的议会选举,这可能导致以色列的巴勒斯坦裔公民在以色列议会(克尼塞特)中失去其主要代表。

Israel’s Central Elections Committee has voted to bar the country’s two main Arab-majority political lists from next month’s parliamentary election, potentially leaving Palestinian citizens of Israel without their principal representatives in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.

该委员会还投票决定取消阿拉伯-犹太合作的哈达什党犹太籍政治人物奥费尔·卡西夫,以及巴勒斯坦民族主义政党巴勒德党领导人萨米·阿布·谢哈德的参选资格。

The committee also voted to disqualify Ofer Cassif a Jewish politician from the Arab-Jewish Hadash party, and Sami Abu Shehadeh, the leader of the Palestinian nationalist Balad party.

这些投票并非关于谁能参加10月27日选举的最终定论。最高法院预计将于下周复审这些决定,并已在过去推翻过多次试图排除阿拉伯裔政党和候选人的尝试。

The votes are not the final word on who can run in the October 27 election. The Supreme Court is expected to review the decisions next week and has overturned previous attempts to exclude Arab parties and candidates.

但委员会的决定已引发双重标准的指责:巴勒斯坦领导的政党面临被排除,而由极右翼部长领导、其中一些人已受到国际制裁的政党却仍保留在选票上。以下是该决定的含义。

But the committee’s decision has already prompted accusations of double standards, with Palestinian-led parties facing exclusion while parties led by far-right ministers, some of whom have been sanctioned internationally, remaining on the ballot. Here is what the decision means.

哪些政党被禁止参选?委员会投票决定取消两个独立团体的资格。第一个是“联合名单”,这是一个由哈达什党、巴勒德党和塔阿尔党组成的联盟。第二个是拉阿姆党,也称为“统一阿拉伯名单”,它是独立参选。这两个名单都依靠以色列巴勒斯坦裔公民的支持,后者约占该国人口的五分之一。

Which parties have been barred? The committee voted to disqualify two separate groups. The first is the Joint List, an alliance of Hadash, Balad and Ta’al. The second is Ra’am, also called the United Arab List, which is running on its own. Both rely on support from Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up about one-fifth of the country’s population.

联合名单该名单汇集了三个政党。哈达什党是一个拥有犹太和阿拉伯成员的左翼政党,塔阿尔党主要为以色列巴勒斯坦裔公民的权利而奋斗,巴勒德党则主张建立一个赋予所有公民平等权利的国家。他们同意在本次选举中组成单一名单,意味着他们的候选人将共同出现在选票上。

The Joint List This brings together three parties. Hadash is a left-wing party with Jewish and Arab members, Ta’al campaigns primarily for the rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Balad calls for a state with equal rights for all its citizens. They agreed to contest this election on a single list, meaning their candidates would appear together on the ballot.

这是一种选举策略,旨在避免意识形态相近的政党分散选票。名单还必须获得至少3.25%的全国选票才能进入议会,因此通过联合,小党可以合并选票,降低各自跌破门槛的风险——一旦跌破门槛,它们将一个席位也得不到。

It is an electoral tactic used to not split votes among parties that are similar ideologically. A list must also win at least 3.25 percent of the national vote to enter the Knesset, so by joining forces, smaller parties combine their votes and reduce the risk that each falls below the threshold – in which case none of them would win seats.

在目前的120席议会中,哈达什-塔阿勒联盟拥有五个席位。在这五个席位中,三个属于哈达什政客,两个属于塔阿勒。巴勒德党没有席位。

In the current 120-seat Knesset, the Hadash-Ta’al alliance holds five seats. Of the Hadash-Ta’al seats, three belong to Hadash politicians and two to Ta’al. Balad has no seats.

拉姆党 由曼苏尔·阿巴斯领导,单独参选。它更愿意与其他政党就阿拉伯社区的资金和服务进行谈判。拉姆党曾加入2021年至2022年执政的广泛联合政府。联合名单未加入该政府。在目前的议会中,拉姆党拥有五个席位。为什么这些政党被取消资格?

Ra’am Led by Mansour Abbas it is running separately. It has been more willing to negotiate with other parties over funding and services for Arab communities. Ra’am joined the broad coalition that governed Israel from 2021 to 2022. The Joint List did not join that government. In the current Knesset, Ra’am holds five seats. Why have these parties been barred?

这一决定是在右翼政党利库德集团和犹太力量党提交请愿书后作出的,后者指控这些政党和候选人否认以色列作为犹太民主国家的存在权利,支持对以色列的武装斗争或煽动种族主义。

The decision followed petitions by the right-wing parties, Likud and Otzma Yehudit, which accused the parties and candidates of denying Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state, supporting armed struggle against Israel or inciting racism.

该委员会由一名最高法院大法官担任主席,但其投票成员代表卸任议会中的各政党。因此,政客们投票决定竞争对手的政党和候选人能否参选,尽管最高法院拥有最终裁决权。

The committee is chaired by a Supreme Court justice, but its voting members represent parties in the outgoing Knesset. Politicians therefore vote on whether rival parties and candidates can contest the election, although the Supreme Court has the final say.

据代表这些名单和候选人的巴勒斯坦法律权利组织“阿达拉”称,委员会以18比5的票数决定取消拉姆党资格,在另一次单独投票中以18比5的票数决定取消联合名单资格。还以18比5的票数取消了卡西夫的资格,以31比4的票数取消了阿布·谢哈德的资格。

The committee voted 18-5 to bar Ra’am and, in a separate vote, 18-5 to bar the Joint List. It also voted 18-5 to bar Cassif and 31-4 to bar Abu Shehadeh, according to Adalah, the Palestinian legal rights group representing the lists and candidates.

总检察长加利·巴哈拉夫-米亚拉反对取消这两个名单和卡西夫的资格,称证据不符合法律门槛。然而,她在阿布·谢哈德问题上持不同立场。针对他的案件部分集中在他于2023年10月8日(哈马斯袭击以色列的第二天)发表的一篇文章上。

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara opposed the disqualification of the two lists and Cassif, saying the evidence did not meet the legal threshold. She took a different position on Abu Shehadeh, however. The case against him centres in part on an article he wrote on October 8, 2023, the day after Hamas’s attacks on Israel. The article was published on the Arab 48 website and referred to the attack as “an important historic event militarily, politically and strategically”.

该文章发表在“阿拉伯48”网站上,文中将该袭击称为“在军事、政治和战略层面均具有重要意义的历史事件”。总检察长声称,其措辞可能构成对武装斗争的支持。

The attorney general claimed its wording could amount to support for armed struggle.

阿布·谢哈德拒绝接受这种解读。他在X平台上表示,他反对武装斗争,支持“为和平、正义与平等而进行的政治和公民斗争”。

Abu Shehadeh rejects that reading. He said on X that he opposed armed struggle and supported a “political and civil struggle for peace, justice, and equality”.

以色列其他反对党支持取消阿布·谢哈德的参选资格。反对党“民主党”领袖亚伊尔·戈兰谈到阿布·谢哈德时说:“想要犹太-阿拉伯伙伴关系的人不会这样说话,绝无例外。”他称,对武装斗争或伤害平民给予任何合法性都是“红线”。

Other opposition parties in Israel support the disqualification of Abu Shehadeh. Yair Golan, leader of the opposition Democrats party, said of Abu Shehadeh: “Whoever wants a Jewish-Arab partnership does not speak this way, period,” he said, calling any legitimacy given to armed struggle or harm to civilians “a red line”.

“阿达拉”法律中心对针对阿布·谢哈德的指控提出异议。该中心称,文章中不包含任何煽动暴力的内容,并辩称针对“联合名单”的请愿书主要依赖旧材料或法院此前已审查过的立场。该中心计划向最高法院提起上诉。

Adalah disputes the case against Abu Shehadeh. It says the article contains no call for violence and argues that the petitions against the Joint List largely rely on old material or positions previously examined by the courts. It plans to challenge the decisions in the Supreme Court.

与此同时,总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡仍具备参选资格,尽管他因涉嫌在加沙地带犯下战争罪和反人类罪而面临国际刑事法院(ICC)的逮捕令,且自2020年起开始的贪腐审判仍在进行中。内塔尼亚胡否认所有指控。

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, remains eligible to run, despite being the subject of an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, and a corruption trial that began in 2020 and remains ongoing. Netanyahu denies the allegations against him.

卡西夫此前曾在2019年大选中被取消参选资格,后经最高法院推翻。他称周三的决定是“以色列残存民主棺材上的又一颗钉子”。他表示,他和“联合名单”将进入下一届克内塞特。

Cassif, whose disqualification from a previous election was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2019, called Wednesday’s decisions “another nail in the coffin of the remnants of democracy” in Israel. He said he and the Joint List would be in the next Knesset.

试图排除阿拉伯裔候选人并非新事。阿达拉记录了2003年、2013年、2015年、2020年和2022年大选中的类似挑战。最高法院曾多次推翻中央选举委员会的决定,但这一历史无法保证法院此次将如何裁决。那极右翼呢?

Attempts to exclude Arab candidates are not new. Adalah has documented challenges in elections in 2003, 2013, 2015, 2020 and 2022. The Supreme Court has repeatedly reversed committee decisions, but that history offers no guarantee of what it will do this time. What about the far right?

要求取消内塔尼亚胡内阁中两名极右翼部长资格的请愿被中央选举委员会驳回,这两名部长分别是国家安全部长伊塔马尔·本-格维尔领导的“犹太力量党”以及财政部长贝扎莱尔·斯莫特里奇领导的“宗教锡安主义党”。

Petitions which sought to disqualify the two far-right ministers in Netanyahu’s cabinet, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party, were rejected by the election committee.

本-格维尔和斯莫特里奇均主张驱逐加沙巴勒斯坦人并吞并被占领的约旦河西岸,因其针对巴勒斯坦人的行动和言论而面临国际制裁。

Ben-Gvir and Smotrich have both advocated the displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and the annexation of the occupied West Bank, and face international sanctions over their actions and rhetoric towards Palestinians.

据《国土报》报道,总检察长巴哈拉夫-米亚拉曾多次与内塔尼亚胡政府发生冲突,她表示禁止这两个极右翼政党参选缺乏法律依据。然而,戈兰则表示他支持取消本-格维尔的参选资格。

Attorney General Baharav-Miara, who has repeatedly clashed with Netanyahu’s government, said the bids to bar the far-right parties lacked a legal basis, according to Haaretz. However, for his part, Golan has said he supported disqualifying Ben-Gvir as well.

人权倡导者乌巴伊·阿拉布迪谴责了这一决定。他告诉半岛电视台,委员会决定“不禁止公开呼吁对巴勒斯坦人进行种族清洗和种族灭绝的以色列政客、政党或名单”。“甚至没有决定将他们的言论视为极端言论。

Human rights advocate Ubai Al-Aboudi condemned the decision. The committee, he told Al Jazeera, has decided “not to bar Israeli politicians, parties or lists that are openly calling for the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians”. “It has not even decided to view their statements as extreme.

“这表明,目前的以色列政治结构仍将巴勒斯坦人视为人口威胁,仍在妖魔化巴勒斯坦人。” 接下来会发生什么?

“This shows that the current Israeli political structure still views Palestinians as a demographic threat, is still vilifying Palestinians.” What happens now?

以色列约五分之一人口是巴勒斯坦人。如果最高法院维持针对“拉姆党”和“联合名单”这两个主要阿拉伯裔政党名单的取消资格投票,选民仍可为其他政党投票,但这两个主要阿拉伯裔名单将无法参选。法院还将决定卡西夫和阿布·谢哈德是否可以参选。

About one-fifth of Israel’s population is Palestinian. If the Supreme Court upholds the votes against both Ra’am and the Joint List, voters could still cast ballots for other parties, but neither of the two main Arab-majority lists would be able to contest the election. The court will also decide whether Cassif and Abu Shehadeh can stand.

阿拉布迪表示,早先试图禁止阿拉伯裔代表参选的尝试曾被推翻,但这次投票走得更远。“这是所有代表首次被禁止参选,”他说,并将其描述为“当前以色列政治结构心态和极端主义的标志”。

Al-Aboudi said earlier attempts to bar Arab representatives had been overturned, but this vote went further. “It is the first time that all representation has been barred,” he said, describing it as a sign of “the mentality and extremism of the current Israeli political structure”.

最终决定权掌握在最高法院手中。阿勒-阿布迪表示,该院过往的判决提供了一些希望的依据,但他补充道,鉴于当前的政治氛围,尚不清楚最高法院是否会推翻委员会决定的“部分、全部或不推翻”。

The final decision rests with the Supreme Court. Al-Aboudi said its past rulings offer some grounds for hope, but added that, given the present political atmosphere, it is unclear whether it would overturn “part, all or none” of the committee’s decisions.