By Kamryn Page
Associate Editor Journal of Global Rights and Organizations
On March 30th, the Israeli Knesset approved legislation that significantly expanded the use of the death penalty, marking a major shift in Israeli criminal law and raising concerns about compliance with international human rights standards. The development comes in the wake of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) July 2024 Advisory Opinion, which found Israel in violation of international legal obligations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The newly approved law introduces capital punishment as the default sentence for individuals convicted of intentional killings classified as terrorism in the West Bank. While Israeli law has historically permitted the death penalty in limited circumstances such as genocide, it has not been applied since 1962, and the new framework allows military courts to impose death sentences by a simple majority absent a prosecutorial request requirement, and mandates execution within 90 days with no possibility of commutation or pardon.
Critics of the new framework argue that it disproportionately targets Palestinian because Israeli settlers in the West Bank are excluded from its application, despite the framework not explicitly targeting a specific nationality or ethnicity. Within Israel, civilian courts may also impose the death penalty for intentional killings deemed to threaten the existence of the state. Human rights organizations argue that the law introduces discriminatory practices and weakens due process protections such as limited access to legal counsel and reduced oversight mechanisms.
The ICJ’s 2024 Advisory Opinion provides a critical legal context for evaluating the law’s implications, where the Court emphasized that states must ensure equal protection under the law and uphold fundamental rights, including the right to life.
Human rights advocates argue that the new death penalty law contravenes both these principles, as well as obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 6 of the ICCPR restricts the use of capital punishment to the “most serious crimes” and requires stringent fair trial guarantees.
Moreover, the European Union has reiterated its long-standing position that the death penalty is incompatible with human dignity and has called for measures in response to Israel’s actions.
The broader significance of the legislation lies in its potential to deepen concerns about systemic discrimination and accountability. In expanding capital punishment within a contested legal and territorial framework, the law may further strain compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law.
Furthermore, as international scrutiny intensifies following the ICJ’s findings, the implementation and legal challenges to this legislation will likely remain a focal point in ongoing debates over justice and impunity in the region.
For More Information:
United Nations – International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – 1967
