One year on from 7 October: free speech violations in Israel and Palestine

Yesterday marked a year since Hamas’s brutal incursion into Israel, where nearly 1,200 people were killed, including 815 civilians, making it the deadliest day for Jewish people since the Holocaust. The militant group also abducted 251 people, and at least 97 are still thought to be held hostage in the Gaza Strip. Following the attack, Israel launched a devastating assault on Gaza, and has since killed nearly 42,000 Palestinians, of whom nearly 14,000 are children. The conflict has now expanded to Lebanon – where more than 2,000 people have been killed – and Iran, with serious concerns it could escalate into a full-blown regional war in the Middle East.

Amongst the horrendous loss of life and destruction, there has been significant repression of free speech. Israel has banned international journalists from Gaza, whilst the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)’s investigations have found that at least 128 Palestinian journalists and media workers have been killed over the past year, of which five were directly targeted and murdered by Israeli forces. Communication blackouts, such as internet shutdowns, have also prevented individuals from reporting on the situation to the world via social media. Such stifling of free expression makes it impossible to know the full extent of war crimes being committed by both sides.

Israeli journalists have also faced repression, censorship and intimidation by their own state, and they cannot enter the blockaded Palestinian territory unless under strict surveillance by the Israeli Army. According to Reporters Without Borders (RSF), in October 2023 alone, at least 15 journalists were attacked or threatened by the Israeli Security Forces or citizens, with reports of journalists being forced to evacuate their homes, threatened, arrested or assaulted for covering the war.

Additionally, grassroots organisations that join up Israelis and Palestinians in peace-making initiatives have been targeted – Standing Together, an organisation which works with Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel “in pursuit of peace, equality and social and climate justice” saw two of its members arrested last year in Jerusalem for putting up peace-promoting posters.

There are also reports of Hamas crushing dissent in Gaza, including of Palestinians who have publicly criticised the 7 October incursion and have said it has made a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestine even less attainable. According to reporting from Reuters, Palestinian activist Ameen Abed was beaten by masked men and hospitalised after speaking out about the atrocity.

Index looks back at its coverage of the conflict over the past year, which showcases how free speech and journalistic reporting continues to be suppressed in Israel and Palestine.

Israel and Palestine – the key free speech issues 

Freedom of expression looked certain to be a casualty as the Gaza Strip exploded into conflict.

The stakes are high for free expression in Israel-Hamas conflict

In the first month Index CEO Jemimah Steinfeld wrote on the many threats to free expression from the conflict.

Silent Palestinians in Gaza and Israel

Index contributor Samir El Youssef wrote on how Palestinians were being silenced in Gaza and Israel by multiple forces.

The unstilled voice of Gazan theatre 

In Gaza, cultural institutions such as the Ayyam al Masrah theatre have been destroyed. Yet, theatre remains a crucial voice for the displaced, wrote Laura Silvia Battaglia.

The suffering of Wael al-Dahdouh in “deadliest conflict for journalists” 

The war in Israel/Gaza has been the “deadliest conflict for journalists.” Read our interview with Youmna El Sayed on the immense suffering of Al Jazeera English bureau chief in Gaza, Wael al-Dahdouh.

Telling fact from fiction: how war reporting is being suppressed

Journalistic “black holes”, such as in Gaza and Sudan, curtail people’s ability to understand geopolitics and conflict, wrote Index editor Sarah Dawood.

Art institutions accused of censoring pro-Palestine views 

The past year has seen an eruption of censorship in cultural institutions across the world, particularly targeting pro-Palestinian voices, wrote Daisy Ruddock.

Are people in Israel getting the full story on Gaza? 

The world is seeing a completely different war from the domestic audience, wrote Index CEO Jemimah Steinfeld.

X marks the spot where Israel-Hamas disinformation wars are being fought

The Elon Musk-owned social media platform used to be the go-to in times of crisis but its strengths for truth-telling are eroded and all but gone, wrote Sophie Fullerton.

Standing together for peace in the Middle East

Activists working for peace in Israel and Palestine came together at the end of last October to raise their voices.

The world needs to learn from Masha Gessen moments 

The Russian-US writer was at the centre of a controversy yet things were not exactly as they first seemed.

From the Danube to the Baltic Sea, Germany takes an authoritarian turn 

German authorities are increasingly silencing pro-Palestine activism in an effort to stamp out anything they fear could be seen as antisemitic, wrote Jakob Guhl.

Sport faces growing censorship problem over the Israel-Gaza war 

Governing bodies are becoming increasingly heavy-handed in their attempts to remain neutral in the conflict, wrote Daisy Ruddock.

The unravelling of academic freedom on US campuses 

When the lines between speech and action have been ambiguous, US colleges have moved too far towards clamping down on what people say. Now pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli students feel victimised and unsafe but the answer is not more silencing, wrote Susie Linfield.

Israel’s closure of Al Jazeera’s West Bank office is a blow to press freedom

Another example of Israel’s suppression of Palestinian journalists, which stops them from documenting the brutal war in Gaza and beyond, wrote Youmna El Sayed.

Israel’s trajectory into a nascent police state 

Israel’s push towards authoritarianism by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition is not slowing down during the country’s ever-expanding military operations. If anything, it is intensifying, wrote Ben Lynfield.

Israel’s closure of Al Jazeera’s West Bank office is a blow to press freedom

Last week, Israeli soldiers raided the Al Jazeera office in Ramallah, within the occupied West Bank and ordered the network’s bureau to shut for 45 days. 

This is not the first time a media shutdown has happened. In early May, the Israeli army stormed the Al Jazeera bureau in East Jerusalem and closed it after confiscating its equipment, claiming that the network was a threat to Israel’s national security. 

An additional two claims were made by Israel this time, which were that the network “incites terror” and “supports terrorist activities”.

Israel has long exercised suppression against the freedom of press and media in the occupied Palestinian territories. Many Palestinian journalists have been killed, attacked, threatened and arrested. 

Israel has made Palestinian journalists’ jobs in the occupied territories almost impossible. It’s a constant life threatening situation – on many occasions, Israel has deliberately targeted Al Jazeera journalists and their families.

The sniping of Palestinian-US journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in 2022; the targeting of many other colleagues’ families in Gaza, including my own family; the deliberate killing of Al Jazeera journalists in direct attacks; these all resemble Israeli crimes against press freedom and attempts to silence journalists. 

Regardless of the feeling that your press gear labels you as a direct target to the Israeli army, the pain and worry of being a danger to your loved ones is indescribable. 

Since October 2023, Israel’s suppression of the press has reached foreign journalists too, as it has prevented all international journalists from exercising their right to cover one of the most brutal wars in recent history.

I believe this is an attempt to avoid exposure of crimes committed against the Palestinians, and the crisis they face. 

Al Jazeera as a network has long been a prominent voice in covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and its presence in the region has always been crucial for a global audience.

The network’s coverage depends on a large number of journalists, bringing together all aspects of the story at once. 

Over the years, Al Jazeera has built a reputation for its commitment to telling the story from both sides of the divide. Many people across the world turn their sights to Al Jazeera channels for the latest developments of breaking news stories. 

Its coverage isn’t just a reflection of events on the ground it is an avenue for audiences, globally, to understand the complexities of these events and engage with every story. 

The closure of its offices sends a chilling message to the media landscape as a whole.

For years, Al Jazeera has been criticised by Israeli officials for what they allege is biased reporting. Yet, such accusations overlook the network’s fundamental journalistic principle: to show the full spectrum of the story.

I believe that Al Jazeera’s coverage is notably impartial. I say this because it brings to light the narratives of both Israelis and Palestinians, ensuring that no side goes unheard. 

Its reporters don’t shy away from broadcasting the pain and suffering endured by civilians on either side of the conflict. Whether it’s an Israeli family mourning after a rocket attack, or Palestinians in Gaza grappling with the aftermath of airstrikes, or settler violence and illegal confiscation of Palestinian land in the West Bank, Al Jazeera’s cameras capture both human realities.

All this is clear in its coverage since the beginning of the Gaza war. On 7 October 2023, my reporting as a Gaza correspondent was on the Palestinian attacks on Israeli towns with complete objectivity. Other stories for my colleagues in Israel highlighted the aftermath of these attacks and the impact on Israeli families. 

This objectivity is rare and invaluable in a conflict where misinformation, propaganda, and one-sided narratives often dominate. Where many news outlets have taken up clear ideological stances, Al Jazeera has remained steadfast in its commitment to neutrality. It’s not just about giving airtime to both sides – it’s about letting the facts speak for themselves. 

And this, in my opinion, is the true objective of journalism in the first place. Our job as journalists is to inform the public based on facts and evidence, not political agendas. 

But to suggest that this impartiality is a threat worthy of office closures is to misconstrue the role of journalism in a so-called “democratic society”. The very essence of free press is to inform the public, to provide transparency, and to hold those in power accountable. Silencing a media outlet like Al Jazeera is a direct assault on these values.

The closure of Al Jazeera’s offices also highlights a troubling double standard. Israeli authorities have allowed other international news agencies to continue their operations, many of which cover the conflict in ways that are far less nuanced or balanced. Yet Al Jazeera, a network that works diligently to present both Israeli and Palestinian perspectives, is being targeted and its journalists are constantly under attack. What does this say about the future of press freedom in Israel and the occupied territories?

Israel’s trajectory into a nascent police state

Last week, Israel’s authorities took significant steps on the internal front to narrow political freedom, censor cultural expression and increase the power of police in Israeli society, critics of the most right-wing cabinet in Israel’s history say.

Perhaps the gravest step was the unprecedented closure of the communist party office in Haifa to prevent screening of a new film by controversial Palestinian-Israeli director Mohammed Bakri. Although it was only for 10 hours, human rights lawyers stressed the office closure and film banning were done without a court order, setting a precedent for bigger blows to political groups that displease the coalition or police,

 “Police closure of a branch of a party is an action characteristic of dictatorial regimes,” Gilad Kariv, a liberal Jewish legislator wrote on X. “I have reservations about the movie and views of Mohammed Bakri but the attempt to claim that showing the movie represents an immediate danger to public security is a low point and part of a dangerous process.”

A previous Bakri film, Jenin, Jenin, which set in the same locale, the West Bank’s Jenin Refugee Camp in the aftermath of a 2002 Israeli West Bank military operation ordered after suicide bombings, was released later in 2002. After a protracted legal battle, Israel’s high court rejected an appeal by Bakri against a lower court ruling that he had defamed an army officer and upheld a ban on the film, as well as payment of damages of $55,000.

Now, without additional legal ruling or basis, police are also banning the second film, Janin Jenin (Incubations of Jenin), which gives testimonies, some by the same eyewitnesses as in the earlier film, of another Israeli operation against the camp, this time in 2023.

Advocates of censorship say either that the two films are similar or that it doesn’t matter because Bakri is an “antisemite” bent on besmirching Israel. The filmmaker says his goal is to convey an often suppressed Palestinian narrative of life under occupation and the devastation caused to the camp, known as a hotbed of militancy which, as fate would have it, was targeted for another major operation last week.

Shamai Glick, a right-wing activist, took credit for the bans, stressing that police had acted on his complaints. “There is no reason people in Israel and the world should see an antisemitic film just like there is no reason they should see a film that harms the gay community,” he said.

On Tuesday, police ordered the director of a theatre in Jaffa to drop plans to screen Janin Jenin that evening and he complied. Still, Israeli education and culture minister Yoav Kisch called for closure of the theatre through a cutoff of state funding merely because it had planned to show the new movie.

There is more at stake here than the fate of a single film. The absence of court orders required in the past for bannings and the grabbing of more power by the police are seen by left-wing activists as markers on Israel’s trajectory of deterioration into a nascent police state. Their last hope is the moves can be overturned by Israeli attorney general Gali Baharav-Miara, herself a frequent target of the coalition and the right-wing minister in charge of the police, Itamar Ben-Gvir.

“It’s one thing if there’s a court order to prohibit a certain artistic event. Then of course police have to enforce it. But if there’s none and they do that out of their own initiative, that’s incredible,” said leading human rights lawyer Michael Sfard, who has represented Bakri in the past.

The closure order for the offices of the communist party in Haifa, which was reviewed by Index on Censorship, raises questions about transparency. The document said preventing screening of the film was necessary “to safeguard the security of the public” but did not delineate the alleged threat. It added that showing the film could lead to “disturbances of the public order” but specified that the intelligence information on which the decision was based needed to be kept classified.

The coalition says tougher steps are needed to thwart incitement during the Gaza war that was ignited by Hamas’s brutal attacks on southern Israeli communities on 7 October. This triggered Israel’s devastating assault on Gaza, which has killed more than 40,000 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Police, for their part, deny any ulterior motive in the recent steps. “The Israel Police operates as an apolitical entity, with our role being to enforce the law rather than create it,” the police spokesman’s office said in response to queries. “Our primary goal is to maintain order and public safety.”

But the more democratic tendencies in Israel view Ben-Gvir as an especially dangerous actor in the government’s ongoing bid to remove checks on its power. This started last year with proposals to undermine the judiciary and is now gaining renewed traction while the public is distracted by war.

The communist party, represented in the Knesset as part of the Hadash grouping, said the closure was ordered just before the film’s screening and limited to 10 hours to preclude the party from going to court to challenge it.

Reem Hazzan, the Hadash leader in Haifa who was interrogated by police before the closure, said the film was to be screened in a closed room in front of about 60 people and followed by the collection of donations for the relief of Gaza civilians. Hazzan says there has never before been such a closure, even when Israeli Palestinians lived under military rule until 1966. She alleged the move follows a pattern of interrogations and threats against Hadash activists for organising demonstrations

Bakri recently told the joint Israeli-Palestinian outlet Local Call that the new film “is the continuation of the first movie Jenin, Jenin but with different timing and circumstances.” He said some of his interviewees who spoke in the first film compared the two incursions. He does not show any soldiers in the new film.

According to Haaretz, it has segments from the first film, a section on Bakri’s legal and personal troubles as a result of the first movie, explanation of the plight of Palestinian refugees since their displacement in 1948 and it gives the most emphasis to Israel’s incursion into Jenin camp last year.

Glick admitted he had not seen the new movie, nor did he think this was necessary. “If Hitler today published a book then I would also come out against it without reading it,” he said.

Exhibition about Russian political prisoners cancelled over Israel-Gaza row

A Russian art collective which was due to open a show in London highlighting the plight of opponents of the Putin regime claim their exhibition was cancelled at the last minute because one of them was Israeli.

The Pomidor group was founded in Moscow in 2018 by the artists Polina Egorushkina and Maria Sarkisyants, but the duo was forced to relocate two years ago after the Kremlin crackdown on opposition activity. Egorushkina now lives in London and Sarkisyants in Ashkelon in southern Israel.

Their latest show, Even Elephants Hold Elections, was part of an ongoing project about free expression designed to challenge people in democratic countries to understand life in an authoritarian regime and reflect on their own experience. Pomidor’s work includes embroidered banners celebrating political prisoners which the artists display in friends’ windows and phone booths on the street.

Among these are tributes to Viktoria Petrova, imprisoned in a psychiatric unit for anti-war social media posts, Mikhail Simonov, a 63-year-old pensioner arrested for comments on other people’s social media and 13-year-old Masha Moskaleva, who was taken away from her father after drawing anti-war pictures at school.

The show was due to open on 3 July at the Metamorphika Gallery in east London. But on the evening before, the two artists were told the gallery had received messages raising concerns about “inappropriate behaviour” on social media.

This referred to two posts pinned on Maria’s Instagram account. One post from 7 October expressed her horror at the “terrible evil” and included the words, in Russian, “Israel my beloved, we are here, we are here to support each other, all my thoughts are with the kidnapped, let only them return home alive. Eternal memory to the fallen.” A second post marked the one-month anniversary and expressed solidarity with the Israeli hostages and their families.

Sarkisyants told Index they were called to an urgent meeting the next day: “They showed me the two posts and said you should clarify your position. I said, I am from Israel and there was nothing in the post but facts: 1200 people were killed and 300 became hostages.”

The gallery asked Pomidor to sign a joint statement with Metamorphika condemning “the Zionist regime”, which they refused to do. “I’m Israeli. I was there,” said Sarkisyants. “What they proposed was impossible for me to do”

After several hours of discussion, Pomidor suggested a compromise of putting the exhibition solely in the name of Polina, but the gallery demanded the collective remove all work connected with Maria. At this point the exhibition was cancelled.

Pomidor posted on Instagram: “The problem came up because Maria is from Israel.”

This is something the gallery strongly denies. Metamorphika founder Simon Ballester told Index: “We were really compassionate with her story. But we asked her to say she had empathy for Palestinians and was against the war crimes.”

Ballester said the problem came when Sarkisyants expressed her support for the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza.

“It’s outrageous” the artist told Index. “I told them I do not support Netanyahu or his government. I feel they betrayed us. We expected them to protect us, but they didn’t. But I support my country Israel and its people.”

Since the cancellation of the show, Metamorphika claims it has received over a thousand “hate mails, insults and threats”. According to Ballester, he and his colleagues have been accused of being “Nazis, rapists, antisemites and misogynistic scumbags”.

Asked if he now regretted cancelling the show he said: “I think it was the right thing. I’m sorry it was the day of the show. That was really unfortunate.” He said the gallery operated on humanist principles and was striving for peace and equality.

The Pomidor exhibition will next travel to Montreal in Canada and the artists are in discussion with a gallery in London to host the show later in the year.