Israel Bans Five Palestinian Media Outlets in Jerusalem

Israel’s decision to ban five Palestinian media outlets operating in occupied East Jerusalem marks a significant escalation in the long-running struggle over information control, security policy, and press freedom in the city. The closures, announced Sunday by Defence Minister Israel Katz, were justified on national security grounds but immediately drew condemnation from Palestinian media organizations and commentators.

Security Rationale And Legal Tools

According to Israeli army radio, Katz classified Quds Plus, Miraj, Al-Maydan, Al Quds al-Asima, and Asima Agency as “terrorist organisations.”

The decision followed an assessment by Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, which said Hamas was attempting to inflame tensions in Jerusalem during Ramadan by using websites as “fronts for the movement.”

Israeli authorities did not publish further evidence supporting the designation. Under Israel’s anti-terrorism laws, such classification permits authorities to shut down organizations, prohibit their publications, and suspend digital operations.

Israeli Army Radio noted that the designation framework enables the state to halt both physical and online activities linked to the banned entities.

Information Control And Al-Aqsa Coverage

Commentators framed the move within a broader pattern of restrictions on Palestinian reporting in Jerusalem, particularly coverage related to Al-Aqsa Mosque.

This means one thing: the occupation is heading toward a decisive move in the coming days and weeks in Jerusalem and at the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque. That is why it is preemptively silencing all the Jerusalemite media voices completely.

Professor of Jerusalem Studies Abdullah Marouf

Palestinian groups argue that Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of Islam’s holiest sites, has increasingly become a focal point of contestation. Since Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967, access restrictions, permit regimes, and periodic closures have intensified, especially during religious holidays and periods of unrest.

Journalists Arrested, Activities Suspended

Days before the ban, Palestinian journalist Nisreen Salem Al-Abd was arrested while reporting in Jerusalem. A lawyer said she was later released under conditions including 10 days of house arrest, a temporary ban on using her mobile phone and social media, and a 180-day prohibition from entering Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Asima Agency announced it had suspended all activities, stating the pause was taken “not as a retreat from the position or an abandonment of the message, but to protect its Jerusalemite correspondents and journalists from the oppression and aggression of the occupation.”

The agency added: “Jerusalem will remain our compass, Al-Aqsa Mosque our cause, and the free word is a covenant that does not expire with time.”

Press Freedom Dispute Widens

The Palestinian Media Forum condemned the closures, describing them as “a clear attempt to suppress the independent Palestinian voice.”

We see the decision as a blatant violation of press and freedom of expression, and a breach of international standards that guarantee freedom of media work.

Palestinian Media Forum

The bans follow a series of recent incidents involving Al-Aqsa Mosque. Israeli authorities barred thousands of Palestinian worshippers from the compound during the first Friday prayers of Ramadan last week, despite many holding previously issued permits.

Last week, Israeli police also arrested the mosque’s imam inside the courtyard, an action Palestinian groups said heightened tensions during the holy month.

Data from Gaza’s local government media office states that 260 journalists were killed in Israeli attacks between October 7, 2023, and January 23, 2026.

The tally, cited by Palestinian authorities and echoed by press advocacy groups, includes reporters, camera operators, editors, and other media workers across local and international outlets.

The figure has intensified concerns among press freedom organizations, which describe Gaza as one of the world’s most dangerous environments for journalists, while critics call for independent investigations and stronger civilian protections under international law.