Israel created history recently according to National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. Celebrating with champagne in the Knesset, his colleagues wearing noose-shaped lapel pins, they marked the passing of a new law. The law mandates the death penalty by hanging for Palestinians convicted of deadly attacks in Israeli military courts. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu supported the bill, which passed with 62 votes in favor and 48 against. The celebrations were deemed authentic.
The law is straightforward in its approach. Palestinians found guilty in Israeli military courts of terrorist acts resulting in fatalities must face execution within 90 days of conviction, with a possible extension to 180 days. The option for a judge to commute the sentence to life imprisonment exists but only under loosely defined exceptional circumstances. Notably, the prosecution isn’t even required to request this. The death penalty is the default starting point.
Critics were quick to highlight the practical implications of the law. While Jewish Israelis are theoretically subject to it as well, the condition for application specifies that the killing must have been intended to “negate the existence of the State of Israel.” Human rights organizations observed that this criteria predominantly targets Palestinians. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel labeled it unconstitutional and discriminatory, filing an immediate petition with the Supreme Court. The United Nations Human Rights Office urged Israel to repeal the law, citing violations of the prohibition on racial segregation and apartheid.
For the over 9,300 Palestinians currently incarcerated in Israeli prisons, the law does not alter existing sentences retroactively. However, for those still undergoing military court proceedings, the landscape has significantly shifted. These courts boast a conviction rate of 96%, making the death penalty the likely outcome for qualifying charges. The possibility of reprieve is minimal and vaguely defined. Amnesty International denounced the law as a public demonstration of cruelty and discrimination, notably following Israel’s dropping of charges against soldiers accused of assaulting a Palestinian detainee not long before.
The law did not emerge in isolation. While the Knesset deliberated, the West Bank witnessed another week of what the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs now terms as a sustained surge in settler violence. The first three months of 2026 saw over 1,697 Palestinians displaced, surpassing the total for the entire previous year. Five Palestinians were fatally shot by settlers in just 11 days in March, as documented by Human Rights Watch. Instances of arson, attacks on funerals, and late interventions by Israeli forces were reported frequently.
The Israeli government approved an additional 50 million shekels for security equipment at illegal settlement outposts, including drones, night vision goggles, and generators. Under the current administration, at least 191 illegal outposts have been established. Settlers utilize livestock to assert control over agricultural lands systematically, with well-funded infrastructure facilitating displacement.
In this context, the concept of Greater Israel, once considered a fringe idea, now warrants serious consideration. It envisions Israeli dominion over the entire land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, without a viable Palestinian state. What was once merely rhetoric increasingly resembles a tangible policy agenda. Legal barriers to settler land acquisitions in the West Bank have been dismantled, and military operations now encroach upon territories previously under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction. Land registries have been opened to facilitate settlement expansion.
Over 600 prominent diaspora Jews signed a letter condemning the violence as morally reprehensible and a strategic threat to Israel’s future. Additionally, more than 2,000 Israeli artists, 600 academics, and a Nobel laureate voiced similar concerns. While the majority of Israeli society opposes settler violence, the government appears unresponsive to these sentiments.
The United States expressed concern over the situation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hinted at potential action from Israel with a noncommittal “maybe,” indicating the level of external pressure to address the issue.
– Ends