Who Does the Law Require to Sentenced to Death?

To view the definitions of the ratings, click here right - the statement is mostly correct not accurate - substantial parts of the statement are wrong misleading - the statement creates a false impression or takes facts out of context incorrect - the statement is wrong in your judgment - the factual situation is too complex for a clear-cut rating fact-check summary claim: According to the law, a terrorist who committed murder must be executed what is correct: ● The law sets a life sentence for anyone who "intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of denying the existence of the State of Israel" what is incorrect: ● This is not a mandatory penalty, and the court may also sentence such a person to life imprisonment rating: inaccurate This week a deadly attack took place in southern Sharon, in which Staff Sgt. (res.) Haim Klomiti, may his memory be for a blessing, was killed and five others were injured. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir rushed to respond, and shortly after the attack became known he wrote on social media: "If the terrorist is caught alive, he will be executed, that is the law, and we will demand its implementation. That is exactly why Otzma Yehudit enacted the 'death penalty for terrorists' law." The minister added: "Jewish blood is not hefker. Whoever murders a Jew will see the gallows." Is this really the law? ● What do the rules say about the Knesset working in an emergency? ● What obstacle stands in the way of the "legislative blitz"? The law Ben Gvir referred to is the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, initiated by Knesset members Limor Son Har-Melech (Otzma Yehudit) and Nissim Vaturi (Likud). The law passed its third reading in the Knesset on March 30 this year. Before delving into the law itself, it should be noted that Ben Gvir's interpretation will not stand up to reality, since the terrorist was eliminated by security forces after a chase. For our purposes, it is important to note that the terrorist is Omar Yasin, an Israeli citizen and resident of Tayibe. Why does this matter? The law Ben Gvir mentioned, the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, distinguishes between two categories. The first category is a resident of Judea and Samaria, who is not an Israeli citizen or resident of Israel, who "intentionally causes the death of a person, and the act is an act of terrorism as defined in the Counter-Terrorism Law." In such a case, the terrorist is given the death penalty as a mandatory sentence, unless a court finds "special circumstances that warrant sentencing the terrorist to life imprisonment." But as noted, the terrorist from the attack Ben Gvir spoke about is an Israeli citizen, so he does not fall under the first category. If so, we move to the second category. Here the law refers to the Penal Law, and there is no dispute that it applies to Israeli citizens. In this section, the law refers to anyone who "intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of denying the existence of the State of Israel." Critics of the law, such as experts at the Israel Democracy Institute, argue that this is "a very vague objective," and that "it is not at all clear how it will be proven, and what presumptions and legal and investigative tools will be used to infer it from the offender's actions." But under this category, there is no obligation to impose the death penalty. The law states that a person who falls under this definition is subject to "death or life imprisonment, and only one of these punishments." To sum up: under the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, the death penalty as a mandatory punishment is imposed on a resident of Judea and Samaria who is not an Israeli citizen. In the case of an Israeli citizen who "intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of denying the existence of the State of Israel," the law allows a court to choose between life imprisonment and the death penalty. No response was given on behalf of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. Bottom line: Ben Gvir's remarks are not accurate. When it comes to a terrorist who is an Israeli citizen, there is no חובה, obligation, to impose the death penalty. That חובה applies only when the terrorist is a resident of Judea and Samaria who is not an Israeli citizen or resident of Israel. For the full fact-check, click here Name: Itamar Ben Gvir Party: Otzma Yehudit Publication: X Quote: "If the terrorist is caught alive, he will be executed, that is the law, and we will demand its implementation. That is exactly why Otzma Yehudit enacted the 'death penalty for terrorists' law" Date: 07.06.26 Rating: inaccurate This week a deadly attack took place in southern Sharon, in which Staff Sgt. (res.) Haim Klomiti, may his memory be for a blessing, was killed and five others were injured. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir rushed to respond, and shortly after the attack became known he wrote on social media: "If the terrorist is caught alive, he will be executed, that is the law, and we will demand its implementation. That is exactly why Otzma Yehudit enacted the 'death penalty for terrorists' law." The minister added: "Jewish blood is not hefker. Whoever murders a Jew will see the gallows." Is this really the law? The law Ben Gvir refers to is the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, initiated by Knesset members Limor Son Har-Melech (from Otzma Yehudit, Ben Gvir's faction), Nissim Vaturi (Likud), and a group of Knesset members. The law passed its third reading in the Knesset on March 30 this year, with 62 in favor and 48 opposed. Before discussing the law, it should be noted that the terrorist was eliminated by security forces after a chase. For our purposes, it is important to note that the terrorist is Omar Yasin, an Israeli citizen and resident of Tayibe. Why is this important? The law Ben Gvir mentioned, the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law, distinguishes between two categories. The first category (Section 3 of the law) is a resident of Judea and Samaria, who is not an Israeli citizen or resident of Israel, who "intentionally causes the death of a person, and the act is an act of terrorism as defined in the Counter-Terrorism Law." In such a case, the terrorist is sentenced to death as a mandatory punishment, unless for special reasons he should be sentenced to life imprisonment. But as noted, the terrorist from the attack Ben Gvir referred to is an Israeli citizen, so he does not fall under the first category. If so, we move to the second category (Section 6 of the law). Here the law refers to the Penal Law, and there is no dispute that it applies to Israeli citizens. In this section, the law refers to anyone who "intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of denying the existence of the State of Israel." Critics of the law, such as experts at the Israel Democracy Institute, argue that this is "a very vague objective," and that "it is not at all clear how it will be proven, and what presumptions and legal and investigative tools will be used to infer it from the offender's actions." But under this category, there is no obligation to impose the death penalty. The law states that a person who falls under this definition is subject to "death or life imprisonment, and only one of these punishments." To sum up: the death penalty as a mandatory punishment is imposed on a resident of Judea and Samaria who is not an Israeli citizen. In the case of an Israeli citizen who "intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of denying the existence of the State of Israel," the law allows the court to choose between life imprisonment and the death penalty. No response was given on behalf of National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. In conclusion, when it comes to a terrorist who is an Israeli citizen, there is no obligation to impose the death penalty. That obligation applies only when the terrorist is a resident of Judea and Samaria who is not an Israeli citizen or resident of Israel. Therefore, Ben Gvir's remarks are not accurate. "The shortage of hotel rooms is making vacation apartments very sought after" Please note: The Globes editorial team strives for a diverse, substantive and respectful discourse in accordance with the ethical code set out in the trust report under which we operate. Expressions of violence, racism, incitement or any other inappropriate discourse are automatically filtered and will not be published on the site.