根據《以色列時報》7月24日報導，約50名法籍猶太青少年連同夏令營領隊，在西班牙乘坐由瓦倫西亞飛往巴黎的伏林航空班機起飛前，在候機過程中合唱希伯來語歌曲。儘管歌唱開始後機組人員要求停止，孩子們暫時中止歌唱，但機艙氣氛仍被視為「干擾秩序」。最終，整個團隊被要求下機，其中一名21歲女性領隊與警方發生衝突遭到逮捕。

以色列方面立即對此表示強烈不滿，以色列反猶事務官員稱此事件為「當前最嚴重的反猶風波之一」，並強調此舉恐帶有宗教歧視意圖。以方要求西班牙當局與伏林航空針對此事件展開徹查。西班牙當地猶太社群也發表聲明，呼籲透明調查，以還原真相與釐清動機。

伏林航空則堅決否認任何歧視或反猶動機，聲稱這些乘客在候機區和機艙內的行為已構成安全干擾，甚至干擾機組成員進行安全演示與操作緊急設備。航空公司指出，機組曾多次對此團隊警告，但未獲尊重與配合。最終，在機長判斷安全受到威脅後，依法請求西班牙警方介入，並要求該團隊全部離機以確保飛行安全。

官方聲明中提到，部分下機乘客仍出現與警方高張態度的對峙，最終導致女性領隊遭警方強制逮捕。伏林航空表示，處理全程基於安全考量，非因乘客宗教或民族背景。

依據歐盟航空安全規範及西班牙法律，如果乘客行為干擾安全流程，無視機組警告，妨礙緊急指令或自行操作安全裝置，航空公司與機長有權拒絕其登機，或要求其離機。此類決策必須建立在具體行為事證與合法程序基礎上，並不得基於乘客的宗教、國籍、語言或種族等身份進行歧視。

若未來調查確認航空公司出於安全理由、依合法程序行事，則其決定符合安全原則。然而，一旦調查揭露處理手法含宗教偏見或對乘客權益比例失衡，則可能涉及歧視責任，航空公司與相關人員或遭監管機關、法律訴訟問責。

目前法國與西班牙主管部門已正式介入，要求伏林航空提供完整調查資料，包括機艙內行為錄像、安全演示紀錄與機組通報等證據。同時，以直方與猶太社群組織強烈要求公開透明處理，釐清是否因宗教活動受到不當對待。

若調查最終證實航空公司並無偏見動機，其行為將被視為保障安全的正當操作。但若調查推翻安全理由而揭露系統性偏見，該事件則可能成為航空業界關於乘客服儀與宗教自由的重大案例。無論結果如何，此事提醒業界：在保障航空安全的同時，必須兼顧乘客基本人權與宗教表達自由，在程序正義與安全需求之間取得平衡。

According to a report by The Times of Israel on July 24, approximately 50 French Jewish teenagers and their summer camp counselors were removed from a Vueling Airlines flight departing from Valencia, Spain to Paris. Prior to takeoff, the group began singing Hebrew songs while waiting on board. Although they paused after being asked to stop by the crew, the cabin atmosphere was still deemed to be “disruptive.” Eventually, the entire group was ordered to disembark. One 21-year-old female counselor was arrested following a confrontation with Spanish police.

Israel quickly expressed strong dissatisfaction with the incident. The country’s official responsible for combating antisemitism labeled it “one of the most serious antisemitic episodes in recent memory,” warning that the removal may have involved religious discrimination. Israeli officials demanded a full investigation by Spanish authorities and Vueling Airlines. The Jewish community in Spain also issued a statement calling for a transparent probe to clarify the true motives behind the incident.

Vueling Airlines, however, firmly denied any discriminatory or antisemitic intent. The airline stated that the passengers’ behavior in both the boarding area and on the plane had disrupted order and interfered with the crew’s ability to carry out safety demonstrations and manage emergency equipment. According to the airline, the group had been repeatedly warned by staff but failed to comply. After the captain deemed the situation a potential safety risk, police intervention was requested in accordance with standard procedures, and the group was asked to deplane.

In its official statement, the airline noted that some passengers continued to behave confrontationally with police after disembarking, which led to the arrest of the female group leader. Vueling emphasized that the decision was made purely out of concern for flight safety, not because of the passengers’ religion or ethnic background.

Under European Union aviation safety regulations and Spanish law, airlines and flight captains have the legal authority to deny boarding or request removal of passengers if their behavior disrupts safety procedures, ignores crew instructions, or tampers with emergency equipment. Such decisions must be based on specific, documented behavior and follow proper legal procedures. They may not be made on the basis of a passenger’s religion, nationality, language, or ethnicity.

If future investigations confirm that the airline acted for safety reasons and followed lawful procedures, its actions will be seen as legitimate. However, if the probe reveals that the handling of the incident involved religious bias or was disproportionate to the actual behavior, Vueling and the individuals involved may face legal accountability or sanctions by regulators.

Authorities in both France and Spain have now formally intervened, requesting that Vueling provide full investigative materials, including onboard footage, safety demonstration records, and crew incident reports. Meanwhile, Israeli officials and Jewish organizations are demanding transparency and a thorough review to determine whether the group was unfairly targeted for religious expression.

If the investigation ultimately clears the airline of bias, the case will likely be considered a justified safety measure. However, if it uncovers systemic prejudice masked as a security concern, it may become a landmark case in the aviation industry, raising broader questions about passenger conduct and religious freedom.

Regardless of the outcome, this incident serves as a stark reminder to the airline industry: while ensuring safety is paramount, passenger rights and freedom of religious expression must also be respected. A proper balance must be struck between procedural justice and the demands of aviation security.