TEL AVIV, March 31, 2026 (WAFA) – Israel’s political and security landscape is in a state of turmoil following the approval of a law permitting the execution of Palestinian prisoners, amid broad opposition from senior security officials, legal experts, and civil society organizations.
Opponents, citing intelligence reports and documented legal assessments, argue that the legislation does not serve as a deterrent, but rather constitutes a “ticking time bomb” that threatens to undermine national security and tarnish Israel’s judicial system internationally, with their opposition driven primarily by concerns over Israel’s global image rather than by the law’s contradiction of human rights and international conventions.
At the forefront of security opposition, the Israeli Security Agency (Shin Bet) and the Israeli army have firmly rejected the law. In testimony before the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, former Shin Bet chief Nadav Argaman stated that the death penalty does not deter suicide attackers; rather, it will turn them into saints and martyrs, leading to unprecedented escalation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Similarly, Major General (res.) Amos Yadlin, former head of Israeli military intelligence, warned that the law could incentivize Palestinian groups to carry out abductions of Israeli soldiers and civilians to use as bargaining chips to prevent executions, a move he said would place Israeli lives at direct risk both domestically and abroad, according to his claim.
On the legal front, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara issued a firm opinion describing the law as “unconstitutional” and in conflict with “Israel’s Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty.”
She cautioned that the legislation would cause serious diplomatic repercussions, exposing Israel to international legal action before the International Criminal Court and complicating efforts to defend Israeli military personnel abroad. This position was echoed by the Israel Democracy Institute, where Professor Mordechai Kremnitzer warned that introducing the executioner into the judicial system represents a moral regression that turns the state into an entity that legitimizes cold-blooded killing.
Civil society organizations have also launched a campaign grounded in legal arguments. Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, stated that the law entrenches two separate legal systems based on ethnicity, placing it within the definition of apartheid under international law.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel described the death penalty as “the cruelest and irreversible form of punishment,” warning that judicial errors could result in the execution of individuals later proven to be innocent.
Physicians for Human Rights-Israel also opposed the measure, stressing that compelling medical personnel to oversee executions violates the Tokyo Declaration and global medical ethics, which prohibit doctors from participating in any form of torture or execution.
On the social and community level, the Parents Circle–Families Forum issued an official petition stating that “the blood of the prisoners will not heal our wounds but will open new wounds for thousands of other families,” warning that policies of revenge undermine prospects for future stability.
Even within religious circles, Member of Knesset Moshe Gafni of the United Torah Judaism party spoke out, noting that traditional Jewish jurisprudence warns against “lethal courts” and that systematic executions carried out in the name of the law contradict conservative Jewish values.
Organizations such as the Zulat Institute and Peace Now emphasized that opposition to the law is not merely theoretical, but a security and moral necessity.
They warned that if Israel proceeds with the legislation, it risks aligning itself with non-democratic states, losing legal and political backing from Western capitals, deepening its international isolation, and transforming its conflict with Palestinians into an existential confrontation devoid of political or legal horizons.
Several parties have already filed appeals against the law, including the Adalah Center, which submitted a petition on its own behalf, on behalf of multiple organizations, and on behalf of Member of Knesset Aida Touma-Suleiman.
Speaking to WAFA, Dr. Hassan Jabareen, Director of Adalah, said the likelihood of the law being overturned is very high due to its unconstitutionality.
He explained that the law is not merely criminal legislation, but a colonial political tool aimed at institutionalizing “apartheid” in the most fundamental human right—the right to life, and that, through convoluted legal formulations, the legislator seeks to ensure that executions apply exclusively to Palestinians, while exempting Jewish perpetrators by requiring specific political motives.
Jabareen affirmed that the law delivers a fatal blow to judicial independence, turning the courts into an executive tool stripped of discretion by imposing mandatory penalties that disregard humanitarian and field circumstances, and allowing death sentences to be issued by a simple majority in military courts.
He also stressed the Knesset’s lack of constitutional authority to legislate laws affecting protected populations in the West Bank, describing it as a grave violation of the Hague Regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Jabareen concluded by stating that the declared goal of “deterrence” is a weak claim, refuted by security agencies and international experts from Oxford and Ben-Gurion universities, revealing the law’s true nature as a purely retaliatory measure that amounts to an “international crime” under the Rome Statute and turns the state into an entity that legitimizes cold-blooded killing, far removed from any standards of justice or fair trial.
For her part, Aida Touma-Suleiman told WAFA that the legislation represents the peak of “Jewish supremacy” and apartheid, as it is designed to be applied exclusively to Arabs, while terrorists and killers among the colonists enjoy full impunity.
Touma-Suleiman also criticized the “sadistic displays” accompanying the legislation, from the wearing of gallows pins to executioner costumes, describing them as a clear declaration of intent to turn the state into an “automatic killing machine” targeting restrained prisoners who pose no threat, aimed at satisfying a political desire for revenge.
T.R.
