Joint List (Hadash–Ta'al–Balad)

Ahmad Tibi listed establishing a state commission of inquiry among Hadash–Ta'al’s positions, and Tibi and Ayman Odeh supported a corresponding bill. However, the interview makes clear that the Joint List is a technical bloc, and no source was found that determines Balad’s position on the precise appointment mechanism; the combined profile therefore remains without a position.

Ayman Odeh explicitly called for a fight against abolishing the reasonableness standard. Balad issued an official statement opposing what it described as the government’s coup against the judicial system, alongside criticism of restrictions on protest. Both components of the Joint List oppose the proposal.

All six members of the Joint List, from Hadash, Ta'al, and Balad, supported an eight-year limit at first reading. Coverage across the components is complete, but the evidence dates from 2021 and the current list is a technical alliance, so confidence remains medium.

The sources reviewed contained no party document, quotation, or Knesset action that fully establishes a position on the mechanism in the statement: cancelling unequal allocations and moving them into the regular budget, even at the cost of breaching an existing agreement. General criticism of the budget is not sufficient.

Four of Hadash–Ta'al’s five members voted against the bill, while one did not participate. This is direct evidence for the Hadash–Ta'al component, but Balad is not represented in the current Knesset and no precise parallel source was found for it. Confidence for the combined list is therefore medium.

Clear positions were found in favor of ending the war, opposing occupation, and pursuing a diplomatic settlement, but no precise common Hadash–Ta'al–Balad model was found for a regional–international framework to administer civilian affairs and rebuild Gaza. The mechanism cannot be inferred from a general position.

Hadash opposes a full occupation and military rule in Gaza, and the combined list’s general direction is to end the occupation. However, no equally current and precise source was found for all three components on the combination of security perimeters and freedom of action. Confidence was therefore reduced to medium.

Hadash–Ta'al voted against the Knesset resolution opposing a Palestinian state, while Balad’s platform supports a Palestinian state and a diplomatic settlement. Both components of the Joint List support the statement.

The Hadash and Balad platforms reject annexation, occupation, and settlement in the territories and support Palestinian national rights. Both components of the Joint List oppose the statement.

No documented common position by Hadash–Ta'al and Balad was found on this specific military question. General positions on equality or criticism of the military are not sufficient to establish a position on the statement.

Hadash’s platform opposes settlements, and in 2025 a Hadash publication condemned a plan to reoccupy Gaza and establish settlements there. Balad’s platform calls for dismantling all settlements and defines Gaza as part of a sovereign Palestinian state. All components oppose the statement, although the current alliance is technical.

Hadash–Ta'al voted against the death-penalty law at third reading, and its members petitioned to have it struck down. Balad chair Sami Abu Shehadeh sought to join the petition in June 2026. There are direct and current actions from every component of the technical list.

The Hadash and Balad platforms oppose imposing compulsory military or national service on Arab citizens. Both main components of the list oppose the statement.

The available source opposes compulsory military or national service for Arab society, but the statement concerns personal and financial sanctions on people subject to conscription who lack an exemption, particularly yeshiva students. No shared source or component coverage was found that establishes a position on the exact mechanism, so the position is excluded from the calculation.

The Hadash and Balad platforms support civil marriage and freedom of choice in matters of personal status. The sources are direct but not recent.

The final vote revealed disagreement within Hadash–Ta'al: Sameer Bin Said voted for the law; Aida Touma-Sliman and Ofer Cassif voted against it; and Ayman Odeh was present but did not vote. No direct Balad position was found.

Hadash–Ta'al and Balad supported public transport on Shabbat and local autonomy. The sources are not recent, but they cover the list’s main components.

Neither the platforms of the Joint List’s components nor documented parliamentary action contained a funding condition identical to the one in the statement.

Ahmad Tibi initiated a proposal to add an equality clause to Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, and Balad’s platform expressly calls for a Basic Law on equality and a prohibition on discrimination. The components align independently even within the technical alliance.

Current reporting documents that Hadash, Ta'al, and Balad do not wish to join the particular coalition considered with Bennett and Lieberman, but the statement asks whether an Arab party that accepts the coalition guidelines is eligible in principle to join. Refusal to join one coalition does not negate such eligibility, and in 2022 Balad chair Sami Abu Shehadeh even said he would consider joining under suitable conditions. There is not enough common evidence for a position.

The Hadash and Balad platforms explicitly support progressive taxation, higher taxes on capital and high-income earners, and a lower burden on workers in order to fund social rights and services. Coverage includes both main components, but confidence remains medium because the sources are old and there is no current joint platform.

No current source was found that establishes a position for all Joint List components on expanding the basket of food products subject to price controls.

No current common Hadash–Ta'al–Balad line was found on reducing tariffs on agricultural food imports versus protecting domestic production.

Hadash–Ta'al did not participate in the vote and Balad is not represented. No other common position was found on the criteria for subsidizing daycare.

All of Hadash–Ta'al opposed the order, but Balad is not represented and no position by the new Joint List was found. A component’s position should not be converted into a position for the combined list.

Ahmad Tibi supported retaining the option to use the measure against Jewish nationalist violence, while Ofer Cassif opposed all administrative detention on principle. Balad also opposes administrative detention and its use as a policing tool. The direct disagreement among the components of the technical list therefore remains.

Hadash, Ta'al, and Balad opposed the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law as racist and harmful to families, and called for individual review instead of a blanket ban.

Representatives of Hadash, Ta'al, and Balad supported bills to ban conversion therapy in 2020. No recent source covering all components of the list has since been found.

Hadash–Ta'al called for restoring funding for the civilian program and strengthening local authorities instead of transferring primary responsibility to the Shin Bet. Balad’s platform calls for a civilian strategic plan with local authorities and Arab-community leadership, and Balad expressly rejected using the Shin Bet, the military, and administrative detention to combat crime. The components therefore align independently, although the Joint List is a technical framework.

General support for public transport does not establish a position on congestion charging. No precise common source was found for the list’s components.