by Leonid Tsukanov
[REGNUM] Israel's legal landscape is undergoing significant changes. The Knesset (the Jewish state's parliament) has passed a controversial bill introducing capital punishment for those convicted of "terrorism" offenses. In reality, the law is aimed against Hamas and other groups and movements opposed to Israel.
Absolutely. At least those who act murderously.The "hawks," led by the ideologist of the innovation, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, are jubilant. They believe the threat of capital punishment will seriously dampen the enthusiasm of the Palestinian underground's neophytes, and the law itself will become a prelude to the establishment of a tribunal specifically for sentencing key Hamas functionaries.
| Or Israel will kill them judiciously as well as while fighting, and so reduce the excess of murderous Muslims, as opposed to the peaceful kind. |
| It’s Israel. There are always other factions that disagree, whatever the topic. |
Although Israeli law already provides for the death penalty under a number of articles (treason on the battlefield, participation in genocide, collaboration with the Nazis), the actual use of the death penalty here was extremely rare.
| Indeed. |
Israel has not returned to capital punishment since the 1960s. Even after the terrorist attack at the 1972 Olympics, when public demands for the capture and public execution of all those involved in the attack on Israeli athletes, the authorities opted for a "silent hunt"—eliminating them on the spot, without wasting time and resources on legal proceedings.
And while this tactic generally satisfied the public, the issue of expanding the grounds for imposing the death penalty periodically returned to the agenda. Particularly significant controversy arose over the "terrorist" articles.
Israeli security officials repeatedly called for a crackdown, including due to concerns about the infiltration of radicals from Arab countries in the Middle East. However, they ultimately restrained themselves: the threat was too vague and difficult to interpret. Therefore, those convicted of terrorism offenses could receive multiple life sentences, but not the noose or a bullet.
| Then eventually they were traded to Hamas at high multiples for Israelis and others Hamas had kidnapped. |
Since the outbreak of the conflict in the Gaza Strip in October 2023, public sentiment in Israel has changed dramatically.
Life imprisonment is no longer perceived as a sufficient response to the crime or a guarantee of full punishment for terrorists and insurgents.
| Not when Hamas kidnapped so many from Israel specifically to trade them for imprisoned Palestinians, especially the most evil among them, thus getting political credit from the the general Palestinian population for doing something the secular Palestinian Authority did not. |
This sparked a wave of bills in the Knesset aimed at introducing the death penalty for terrorists. The far-right Otzma Yehudit party, led by Ben-Gvir, was particularly zealous in this regard. Despite numerous rejections and criticism from fellow members, the party members continued to insist on expanding the practice of capital punishment.
And after nearly three years of parliamentary debate, they finally prevailed. The Knesset passed the law imposing the death penalty by hanging for terrorists by a majority vote (62 to 48). All parties in the ruling coalition voted in favor. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also welcomed the decision, calling it "timely."
The opposition came out in opposition, but not as a united front.
In particular, the faction of the supposedly liberal Yisrael Beiteinu party suddenly defected to the side of the death penalty advocates, giving them at least six votes in favor. With this support, the coalition deprived the opposition of its main trump card—the claim that the bill had been passed with minimal margins of approval, and therefore did not reflect the position of Israeli society as a whole.
"BEN GVIR'S LAW"
The new law, already informally dubbed the "Ben Gvir Law," significantly changes law enforcement's approach to combating terrorism. It also defines the areas where the new regulations will be applied to the greatest extent.
For most of the country, the so-called general regime applies, under which the death penalty is prescribed for the murder of an Israeli citizen "for anti-state motives." Denial of the legitimacy of Israeli statehood and the Holocaust may constitute aggravating circumstances.
The legal framework is much stricter in the Judea and Samaria region, home to Palestinian communities. There, the death penalty is becoming the default punishment for those convicted of "terrorism" offenses—regardless of whether the defendant committed murder, established caches, or smuggled weapons.
Only in exceptional cases and with sufficient justification, including the personal guarantee of an Israeli law enforcement officer, can the death penalty be commuted to life imprisonment. This makes the "Ben Gvir Law" an ideal instrument of repression.
Against this backdrop, the "hawks" are boasting that they "heard the public" and softened the final wording, adding the possibility of deferring the sentence "at the discretion of the court."
However, this "concession to the liberals" was more than compensated for by a simplification of the decision-making procedure. Judges now require a simple majority to approve a sentence, rather than unanimity, as was previously the case. The death penalty can appear in a sentence even without a motion from the prosecutor's office.
THE RISK OF ERRORS INCREASES
Rivals of the ruling coalition were dissatisfied with the upcoming legal changes. Former prime minister and current parliamentary opposition leader Yair Lapid
| …who has beautiful hair. He demonstrated the exact caliber of his ability as caretaker prime minister for six months while a snap election was organized, but Bibi Netanyahu was the one to form the next government, thank goodness… |
At the final plenary session, Lapid made sure to point out that the "fighters against terror" had completely forgotten to develop a special legal regime for the Gaza Strip, which is not covered by either the "general approach" or the "special" provisions created to stabilize the situation in Judea and Samaria. This created a legal paradox: Hamas supporters, who fought the Israeli army in Gaza for several years, are largely exempt from the new law.
Although Otzma Yehudit representatives promised to close the loophole with upcoming amendments, Lapid remained adamant. Even with the law amended post factum, Hamas supporters already convicted by Israel could only be sentenced to death if they were arrested again.
Security officials, led by former Defense Minister Benny Gantz, have also voiced criticism. However, unlike Lapid, they are more concerned about the excessively short time frame (no more than 90 days) between the trial and execution, given the irreversibility of the punishment.
The lack of time to double-check the investigator's arguments, coupled with the abandonment of the principle of "absolute consent" by judges, greatly increases the risk of errors against innocent people. The Tuviansky case, which all Israeli prosecutors, both military and civilian, begin their careers with a detailed study and analysis, serves as a silent reminder of the dangers of rushing trials, and the Israeli security forces are hardly eager to add more names to the statistics of errors.
However, the opposition considers the Ben Gvir Law's most weak point to be its inconsistency with the Geneva Convention—specifically, the prohibition on appeals and requests for pardons. This renders the adopted legal mechanism extremely unstable and illegitimate under international law, as stated by the UN and European countries. The latter are even threatening Israel with sanctions if it does not seriously revise the law.
But while external pressure doesn't seem to bother Israel much, the loss of formal ties to international law could derail some long-term plans. The country's authorities make no secret of their dream of holding a tribunal for Hamas's leadership, modeled on the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, and excessive criticism of international institutions could derail these plans.
Therefore, it's quite possible that after a brief testing of the situation, the Netanyahu cabinet will initiate a package of amendments to make the law more humane and compassionate. This, however, does not guarantee a softer approach to investigating the actions of Palestinian insurgents.
| Not so long as they promise to keep repeating 10/7 over and over until the Jews clar out or are all dead, no. |