A coalition of more than 30 international humanitarian and human rights organizations is calling on the European Union to take immediate punitive measures against Israel following the Knesset’s approval of a law that expands the use of the death penalty. In a joint statement, the groups argue that the legislation effectively makes capital punishment mandatory in the West Bank and is designed to apply almost exclusively to Palestinians.
The legislation, introduced by the party of Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir, marks a stark reversal of a decades-long trend; Israel has not carried out an execution nor imposed a death sentence since 1962. The signatories, which include Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Oxfam, warn that the new law not only dilutes basic legal safeguards but imposes capital punishment on what they describe as de facto ethnic or national grounds.
The organizations are urging the EU to uphold its own democratic principles by suspending the trade component of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, arguing that diplomatic engagement has failed to prevent the law’s adoption.
A Two-Tiered Legal Framework
The new law creates a distinct and severe execution regime for the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem. Under these provisions, the death penalty becomes the default sentence for those convicted of intentional killings classified as acts of terrorism. While life imprisonment remains an option, it is reserved for unspecified “special circumstances,” leaving judges with little discretion.
The procedural shifts are equally significant. Military courts are now empowered to impose capital punishment by a simple majority vote, even in the absence of a request from the prosecution. The law mandates that sentences be carried out within 90 days, explicitly prohibiting any possibility of commutation or pardon.
Crucially, the joint statement highlights a glaring disparity in the law’s application: Israeli settlers living in the West Bank are explicitly excluded from these provisions, ensuring that the mandatory death penalty applies only to the Palestinian population.
| Jurisdiction | Default Sentence for Intentional Killing | Key Legal Condition | Applicability |
|---|---|---|---|
| West Bank (Military Courts) | Death Penalty | Classified as “Act of Terrorism” | Palestinians only (Settlers excluded) |
| Israel (Civilian Courts) | Death Penalty or Life Imprisonment | Aim of “negating the existence of the State” | General jurisdiction |
Within Israel proper, civilian courts maintain the authority to impose the death penalty or life imprisonment for intentional killings, provided the act was committed with the intent of “negating the existence of the State of Israel.” The coalition argues that while the law avoids explicit mention of nationality, its structure ensures it targets Palestinians exclusively, utilizing a secretive execution regime by hanging with limited access to legal counsel.
Crossing ‘EU Red Lines’
The European Union has long maintained that capital punishment is incompatible with human dignity. However, the signatories argue that the current crisis transcends a principled objection to the death penalty, pointing to a systemic breach of international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Convention Against Torture.
The statement lists a series of “red lines” that the coalition claims Israel has already crossed, which should trigger EU sanctions. These include the advancement of settlement construction in the E1 area—a move that would break the territorial contiguity of the West Bank—and the ban on UNRWA, an agency heavily funded by EU contributions.
The groups too point to the forced displacement of Palestinians, widespread demolitions of infrastructure, and systemic reports of torture within the prison system. They argue that these actions, combined with the new death penalty law, form a pattern of discriminatory policy that violates the International Court of Justice (ICJ)‘s findings regarding racial segregation, and apartheid.
The Pressure for Trade Sanctions
The call for action comes in the wake of a June 2025 EU review based on Article 2 of the Association Agreement, which found Israel in breach of its human rights obligations. Despite this, the coalition argues that the EU’s response has been insufficient. They point to a March 31 statement by EU High Representative Kallas, which acknowledged the law’s approval but failed to trigger immediate consequences.
The signatories are now demanding that the EU move beyond rhetoric and implement the measures proposed by President von der Leyen in September 2025, specifically the suspension of trade preferences. They argue that the EU cannot claim to support democratic principles while maintaining a preferential trade relationship with a state that has introduced mandatory capital punishment for a specific ethnic group in occupied territory.
The coalition supporting this demand is vast, spanning religious and secular organizations including Caritas Europa, Christian Aid, and the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, signaling a broad international consensus on the urgency of the matter.
The next critical checkpoint will be the EU’s formal response to the joint statement and whether the European Commission will initiate the legal process to suspend the trade components of the Association Agreement in the coming months.
Do you believe the EU should link trade agreements to human rights records in conflict zones? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Disclaimer: This article discusses legal proceedings and human rights allegations. It is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
