On March 25, 2026, a Knesset committee approved the final wording of the “Penal Bill (Amendment – Death Penalty for Terrorists).” The measure could move to its second and third readings this week and, if approved, become law.
Background
Israel has largely abolished capital punishment for ordinary peacetime crimes since 1954, retaining it only in limited circumstances such as certain war crimes and, technically, crimes against humanity or the Jewish people. In practice, when military courts in rare instances imposed death sentences for terrorism-related offenses, those sentences were commuted on appeal. Since Israel’s founding, only two executions followed death-penalty convictions: Meir Tobianski in 1948 (later posthumously exonerated) and Adolf Eichmann in 1962.
Momentum to revive the death penalty intensified after the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023. Lawmakers pushing the change say the attacks and shifts in public sentiment justify harsher punishments. The current far-right government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has the parliamentary majority needed to advance the bill. Opponents argue the proposal is unethical, unconstitutional and discriminatory in practice, since it would fall overwhelmingly on Palestinians.
Legislative history
The draft passed a first Knesset reading in November 2025 and was returned to the National Security Committee for revision; more than 2,000 reservations were filed during the review process.
What the bill would change
The amendment lowers the legal threshold required to impose capital punishment and explicitly frames the law as a tool “to establish the death penalty for terrorists who carried out murderous terror attacks, as part of the fight against terrorism.” Under the draft, a person who intentionally causes death ‘‘with the intent of rejecting the existence of the State of Israel’’ would be eligible for either death or life imprisonment, with only one of those penalties permitted.
The bill creates two procedural tracks: Israel’s civilian criminal courts and military courts in the occupied West Bank. For Palestinians tried by military courts, the draft stipulates a mandatory death sentence for covered offenses — language in the text says the sentence ‘‘shall be death, and this penalty only.’’ A military court could commute such a sentence to life imprisonment only upon finding ‘‘special reasons,’’ effectively reversing current practice. Judicial panels would decide by simple majority rather than unanimity, and avenues for appeal would be sharply curtailed.
Human rights groups and legal advisers
Israeli rights group B’Tselem warned that military courts already convict at roughly a 96% rate, often on confessions obtained under duress or torture, heightening the risk of wrongful executions under a mandatory system. The Knesset committee’s legal adviser, Ido Ben‑Itzhak, criticized the draft for lacking any mechanism for pardons, saying that omission conflicts with international conventions and could create legal problems.
How it would be applied
The amendment is not retroactive and would not apply to alleged perpetrators of the October 7 attacks. Separately, some lawmakers are considering a Tribunals Law to establish a special military tribunal that could try individuals accused in connection with October 7 and potentially impose capital sentences.
Under the draft, the Israel Prison Service would be required to carry out executions within 90 days of a final sentence; the prime minister could request a 180‑day delay from the sentencing court. Executions would be carried out by hanging by a prison service corrections officer.
Political sponsors and context
The bill is sponsored principally by members of the far‑right Jewish Power (Otzma Yehudit) party and has backing from some Likud and Yisrael Beitenu lawmakers. Itamar Ben‑Gvir, leader of Jewish Power and minister of national security, has been a prominent advocate of reviving the death penalty, making it a repeated campaign theme. After the committee vote he described the measure as ‘‘the most important law the Knesset has enacted in recent years,’’ and said it would be fully implemented. Critics contend the timing and emphasis are linked to electoral politics.
Human rights organizations have documented increases in abuse and harsh treatment in detention since the war began. Physicians for Human Rights and other groups reported a rise in mistreatment in prisons and military detention centers under Ben‑Gvir’s tenure. HaMoked, another Israeli rights NGO, reported that at least 94 Palestinian detainees and prisoners died in Israeli custody between the start of the war and August 2025.
Domestic and international opposition
The bill has drawn criticism from a wide array of Israeli and international voices: opposition lawmakers, former and current security officials, rabbis, medical associations, and human‑rights organizations in Israel and the occupied territories.
Ramallah‑based lawyer Sahar Francis called the proposal ‘‘very dangerous,’’ arguing it is discriminatory and would violate international humanitarian law by singling out people under occupation. Israeli opposition lawmaker Gilad Kariv described the measure as ‘‘miserable, crude, immoral and irrational’’ and warned it could damage prospects for hostage negotiations and broader security interests. Yuli Novak, executive director of B’Tselem, said the bill marks a new low in dehumanizing Palestinians and risks codifying cruel treatment.
International bodies have also raised alarms. In February, experts from the UN Human Rights Council urged Israel to withdraw a draft that would create a mandatory death penalty for terrorist acts, saying it would violate the right to life and discriminate against Palestinians in occupied territory. The European Union reiterated its opposition to capital punishment in all circumstances and expressed deep concern about the draft.
If the bill passes its remaining readings and is enacted, it would represent a significant legal shift in Israel’s handling of terrorism-related crimes, with profound legal, ethical and diplomatic consequences.
Edited by: Helen Whittle