The Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, chaired by MK Boaz Bismuth, has approved for first reading a bill by MK Moshe Passal to freeze funds transferred to the Palestinian Authority by the Israeli government when those funds are tied to terrorism, and to channel the frozen money into compensation for victims of terror from Gaza. Under the proposal, an annual amount equal to what the Palestinian Authority paid the previous year to Gaza would be frozen.
The first part of the debate was public and included bereaved families from the October 7 attack, who urged lawmakers to move the bill forward. The second part was closed to the public, where government positions and legal concerns were presented.
Ben Zaurman, whose father was murdered at the Shaar HaNegev junction on October 7, said he does not know where the attacker is now and believes some of the gunmen from that junction returned to Gaza that same day. “I do not know if justice will ever be done,” he said, adding that his family is not covered by some existing aid frameworks and feels left without an adequate response.
Galit Schopan, sister of Ziv Schopan, who was killed in Be’eri, said no amount of money can replace what was lost, but argued that funds originating from groups that encouraged or rewarded terror should be redirected to victims’ families. Moshe Savil of the One Family organization said the bill answers a real need for thousands of families and that compensation cannot erase the pain, but can provide some stability and breathing room.
A Justice Ministry representative warned of legal obstacles to applying the measure to October 7 victims. She said current law allows compensation claims against the Palestinian Authority when it can be shown that it paid the attacker, and there is precedent that even one payment can establish the needed legal link. But she said there is a difficult factual and legal question about the Palestinian Authority’s involvement in the massacre and whether it paid any of the attackers, noting that based on current information, the answer is likely no for many of those involved, making the main challenge proving the required connection between the funds and the attackers.
