Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formally endorsed a controversial bill proposing the death penalty for Palestinian terrorists who murder Israelis, reigniting a heated public and political debate within Israel. The legislation, which remains to be fully drafted, aims to mandate execution within 90 days following a fair trial, with no discretion allowed for mitigation or pardons. The law is backed by the Otzma Yehudit Party, led by its coalition lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech, who stated that the goal is to address the ‘phenomenon’ of terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens, despite the lack of a finalized legal framework.
While Netanyahu initially avoided public support for the bill, reportedly due to concerns over its impact on hostages held in Gaza, his spokesperson confirmed his endorsement. Shosh Bedrosian, a spokesperson for the Prime Minister’s Office, emphasized that the punishment would be applied ‘after a fair trial in our judicial system,’ with the message that ‘anyone that harms the State of Israel and its citizens will face consequences.’ This marks a pivotal moment in Israeli political discourse, as the death penalty has not been used in Israel since 1962, when the SS officer Adolf Eichmann was executed.
The bill’s proponents, including Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, argue that it is both a moral and ethical necessity. Ben-Gvir, the head of the Otzma Yehudit Party, denounced the idea that terrorists should be allowed to live, stating, ‘Whoever raped our daughters, murdered our elders, or slaughtered our children has no right to exist, no right to breathe air for a single second. His sentence is one: to put him on the gallows.’ This rhetoric has fueled the legislative push, with Ben-Gvir vowing to advance the bill ‘with all my might’ until it passes, ‘God willing.’ However, the law’s strict provisions—mandating the execution of convicted terrorists without the ability to offer deals or seek pardons—have drawn sharp criticism.
Opposition voices, including Dr. Amir Fuchs of the Israel Democracy Institute, have warned that the law’s provisions could be both unconstitutional and ineffective. Fuchs argued that research indicates capital punishment is not a significant deterrent for ordinary murderers, and its impact on terrorists—who already risk their lives—may be even weaker. He also highlighted the law’s lack of discretion for courts, which could lead to irreversible consequences. Additionally, he raised concerns about its discriminatory nature, noting that it would not apply to Jewish terrorists, a point he described as ‘discriminatory.’
Critics like Dr. Yaakov Asher, a lawmaker from the United Torah Judaism party, emphasized the religious and moral implications of the bill, particularly under the Jewish principle of pikuach nefesh, which prioritizes the preservation of human life above almost all other commandments. Asher warned that even raising the issue of the death penalty could provoke further terrorism against Jews, arguing that the law ‘could trigger a wave of terrorism against Jews.’
Critical voices, including the Hadash–Ta’al faction in the Knesset, have condemned the bill as discriminatory and incendiary, arguing that it could deepen hatred and fuel extremism. They insist that any measure that ‘protects Jews should not endanger even one.’ Meanwhile, supporters argue that the death penalty is necessary to end the practice of kidnapping Israelis in exchange for prisoner releases, a trend that has seen hundreds of terrorists freed in previous deals. The bill remains subject to amendments and two more legislative readings in the Knesset, keeping the debate alive and unresolved.