The House Committee, chaired by MK Ofir Katz (Likud), convened on Tuesday and held a heated debate on the request submitted by MK Avichay Buaron (Likud), to recommend that the Knesset Plenum remove MK Ayman Odeh (Hadash-Ta’al) from office.
Following the guidelines of Knesset Legal Advisor Adv. Sagit Afik, the debate focused on a statement made by MK Odeh on January 19, 2025, which was published on the X (formerly Twitter) social media platform: “I’m glad for the release of the hostages and the prisoners. From here we must free both peoples from the yoke of the occupation. We were all born free.”
At the start of the debate, Committee Chair MK Katz said, “Many people have asked me why this debate should be held now, during wartime. My answer to them is that it should be now, of all times. While the soldiers are fighting on seven fronts, we have to clear the eighth front, and Ayman Odeh is our eighth front. His statements are broader than the statement submitted by MK Buaron, and it’s important that they be presented here. He acts continuously to weaken the State of Israel, to defame it, to undermine it and to strengthen its enemies.”
MK Buaron, who had submitted the request for the debate, presented a number of quotes by MK Odeh in the media and social networks. “For years, and in a variety of statements, MK Odeh has lauded terrorists, their senders and their families, in an indirect or direct fashion, taking care to straddle the fine line between freedom of speech and incitement and sedition. For years, MK Odeh has served in the Knesset on one hand, and on the other hand has given a tailwind to terrorism and the armed struggle against the State of Israel. Over the years, MK Odeh’s statements have met with a forgiving attitude and tolerance—but no more,” said MK Buaron.
“A person who calls upon Arab police officers to throw their weapons in the face of the occupation forces, a person who declares that the terrorist Israeli occupation should be eliminated, a person who compares the Nukhba terrorists who murdered, raped and decapitated to our hostages, and goes so far as to effectively encourage the enemy during wartime—should not sit in Israel’s Knesset. MK Odeh’s statements, beyond being despicable and contemptible, are dangerous. Each of his statements individually, and certainly all of them together—both in terms of the sharp and charged message they convey and in terms of the recurrent use of loaded terms that foment unrest—undoubtedly constitute a tailwind and support for the struggle of the terrorist organizations and their members,” said MK Buaron.
Knesset Legal Advisor Adv. Sagit Afik said, “In accordance with the standards set in case law regarding section 7a [of Basic Law: The Knesset], it is required that a clear case exist, for which there is a significant mass of clear, unequivocal and compelling evidence showing that the support for armed struggle is a dominant characteristic in the candidate’s aspirations; that direct statements or probable conclusions exist with the clear and unequivocal conclusion of active support for armed struggle of a terrorist organization against the state; and that the candidate has committed deliberate actions to fulfill the aspirations in practice.”
MK Odeh: “The Speaker of the Knesset demanded that all the debates of the Knesset committees be canceled, with the exception of war affairs and my debate. The fascist right wing has succeeded in outlining the boundaries of Arab society’s freedom of speech, and it wants us as subjects. That won’t happen. I reject this procedure; it is illegitimate. The committee chair says about me that I am the eighth front—that is incitement to murder, no less. It’s interesting to see that those who implemented the release of the Israeli hostages and the Palestinian prisoners are legitimate, but I am not. Instead of a state commission of inquiry, you’re investigating me.”
MK Odeh said further, “The procedure is illegal, immoral and undemocratic. This is political persecution. Those who want to label me as an extremist are liars. I denounced October 7 dozens of times. It’s not extreme to fight for the rights of both peoples. The Hadash parliamentary group has not budged a millimeter from our positions; it is this Knesset that has moved towards the extreme right wing. I don’t renounce my words. You can renounce. History will exonerate me and history will judge you.”
Adv. Hassan Rafiq Jabareen, who represented MK Odeh in the debate, stated that all the evidence and the examples presented by MK Buaron were inadmissible and harmed the procedure, because they were not approved by the Knesset legal advisor, who had instructed [the committee] to address only one statement by MK Odeh. “A procedure for removal from office is an extreme procedure. Accordingly, since no criminal investigation was launched for this statement, it certainly does not constitute a cause for terminating his term of office,” said Adv. Jabareen. He stated further that MK Odeh’s statement did not attest to support of armed struggle, since there was nothing in the statement that supported violence directly or implied such support, but it was rather a statement that attested to joy. This statement, he said, regardless of its content, did not meet the necessary evidentiary threshold, which requires clear evidence, the accumulation of which constitutes a “critical mass” as required by law.
MK Ariel Kallner (Likud): “MK Odeh is the representative of Palestinian ideology in the Knesset. He is the greatest anti-humanist. The Knesset should say unequivocally: There is no room for this moral corruption. It’s true that Gaza won for a few hours on that day, but since then we have been defeating them and winning on our eighth front.”
MK Moshe Saada (Likud): “Does anyone doubt that this person supports terrorism? The problem is not with Ayman Odeh, it is with us. We keep tolerating, and we paid a price for this on October 7. It’s unacceptable to me that we speak and laugh and engage in [parliamentary] pairing with these people in the Knesset. You can’t call him a terrorist supporter on one hand, and shake his hand on the other. October 7 requires the Attorney General’s Office to draw a red line, and it requires us to do so as well.”
MK Aida Touma Sliman (Hadash-Ta’al): “I feel strongly that this is not a quasi-judicial procedure. The decision has already been made, and no one cares about hearing the arguments. To say that we’re an eighth front is incitement, not only against MK Odeh, but rather a very clear call for terrorism against us. You won’t distort what we believe in.”
MK Ahmad Tibi (Hadash-Ta’al): “I will say first of all, Ayman Odeh will not be removed from the Knesset. The fact that there is an atmosphere of elections is undeniable. Things have been said that make the blood of the Arab Members of Knesset forfeit. Conversely, there are MKs who said that an atom bomb should be dropped on Gaza. No one removed them from office. There is a Member of Knesset who said that Gaza must be starved; that is a war crime. But no one removes you from office, because you’re Jewish. There is Jewish supremacy both in the atmosphere and in the practice.”
MK Simon Davidson (Yesh Atid): “On October 7 something significant changed in my life. My mother, a Holocaust survivor, cried on that day and said repeatedly that this is what was done to her parents. I can’t be accused of racism, because I believe that we should tend to the conditions of every Arab child. And when I hear a Member of Knesset comparing a hostage to a prisoner I am shocked. MK Odeh asked me to withdraw my signature, and I told him that if he were to get up in the plenum and renounce his statement, I would withdraw my signature and this debate would not be held. Why? Because I am the 70th signatory.”
At the conclusion of the debate, the committee chair announced that the committee would reconvene next Monday for a debate and vote.
