This law tries to take away the hope that you're living on
In the long shadow of October 7, 2023, Israel has chosen the courtroom — and the executioner's chamber — as instruments of historical reckoning. The Knesset voted 93 to 0 to establish a special military tribunal empowered to sentence Hamas attackers to death, invoking the gravity of Nuremberg and Eichmann while drawing warnings that justice pursued through compromised means may hollow out the very values it claims to defend. The law arrives at the intersection of grief, sovereignty, and accountability, where the line between justice and vengeance is rarely easy to draw.
- A unanimous parliament has handed Israel's government extraordinary power to try and execute those accused of the worst attack in the country's history — a rare moment of political unity born from collective trauma.
- Human rights organizations warn that over a thousand Palestinians are already held without charges, many allegedly tortured, and that this new court's loosened evidentiary rules could turn proceedings into predetermined verdicts.
- Bereaved families are not simply bystanders — they shaped the legislation, demanded transparency, and are now asking harder questions about who failed to prevent October 7 in the first place.
- In Gaza, families of the missing and detained watch the law pass with dread, fearing it extinguishes the last hope of seeing their relatives alive.
- Israel frames the public broadcast of trials as sovereign accountability before the world; critics see the same spectacle as a stage for show justice rather than due process.
- The proceedings are expected to begin soon, carrying the weight of 1,200 Israeli dead, 251 hostages, and 72,740 Palestinian lives lost — a legal moment unfolding inside a wound that has not stopped bleeding.
Israel's parliament voted 93 to 0 this week to create a special military court in Jerusalem empowered to try — and execute — those accused of carrying out the October 2023 Hamas attacks. The legislation passed with rare cross-party unity, with twenty-seven members absent or abstaining. The court will hear charges ranging from terrorism and murder to sexual violence and genocide, and key moments of the proceedings will be filmed and broadcast publicly — a framework some supporters liken to the 1961 Eichmann trial.
The October 7 attacks killed more than 1,200 Israelis, mostly civilians, and saw 251 people taken hostage into Gaza. The conflict that followed has claimed 72,740 Palestinian lives. The new law targets those directly involved in the assault — captured Nukhba fighters and others — while 1,283 people remain held as unlawful combatants without formal charges, and several hundred more face criminal suspicion related to October 7.
Opposition co-sponsor Yulia Malinovsky framed the law as an assertion of Israeli sovereignty, calling the coming trials historic. Bereaved families, including Carmit Palty Katzir — who lost her father, her brother, and saw her mother taken hostage — participated in shaping the legislation and demanded that sensitive findings be shared with families before public release.
Human rights groups have raised serious alarms. The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel warns that modified evidentiary rules and documented abuse of Palestinian detainees risk producing convictions — and executions — based on confessions extracted under torture. The Israeli government denies systematic abuse and says it complies with international law. Justice Minister Yariv Levin described the enormous evidentiary undertaking behind the court, including thousands of hours of video reviewed and evidence archived by the state.
In Gaza, families of the missing gathered outside the Red Cross to protest the law. Hisham al-Wahad, whose brother disappeared near the Erez crossing on October 7, called it cruel — a law that takes away hope. Meanwhile, polls show growing support for capital punishment among Jewish Israelis, even as some bereaved families insist the trials address only part of a larger reckoning: who bears responsibility for the failures that made October 7 possible at all.
Israel's parliament voted overwhelmingly this week to establish a legal framework that will allow for the execution of those accused of carrying out the October 2023 Hamas attacks. The Knesset passed the measure 93 to 0, an unusual moment of unity between government and opposition benches. Twenty-seven lawmakers were absent or abstained. The law creates a special military court in Jerusalem to try suspects with charges ranging from terrorism and murder to sexual violence and genocide—all capital offenses under this new regime. Key moments from the proceedings, from opening statements through verdict and sentencing, will be filmed and broadcast on a dedicated website, transforming what some supporters compare to the 1962 trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann into a public spectacle.
The October 7 attacks killed more than 1,200 people in southern Israel, mostly civilians. Hamas fighters also took 251 hostages into Gaza. The scale of the violence was unprecedented in Israeli history. In the months and years since, the conflict has claimed 72,740 Palestinian lives, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry, the majority of them children, women, and the elderly. The new law applies specifically to those accused of direct involvement in the assault—members of the Nukhba special forces unit and other fighters captured in Israel. The Israeli Prison Service currently holds 1,283 people classified as unlawful combatants without formal charges. Several hundred more are held as criminal defendants suspected of involvement in the October 7 events.
Yulia Malinovsky, an opposition politician who co-sponsored the bill, framed the legislation as an assertion of Israeli sovereignty. "May everyone see how the victims and their families look into the whites of the eyes of those murderers, rapists and kidnappers," she said at a news conference before the vote. "May everyone see how the State of Israel is a sovereign state which knows how to hold those who harmed it to account." She called the trials "historic," a moment the world would witness. Victims and bereaved families participated in parliamentary committee discussions leading up to the vote. Carmit Palty Katzir, whose brother was taken hostage from their kibbutz and killed in captivity, whose father was murdered, and whose mother was taken and later released, said she wanted to ensure the rights of the most affected were protected. She also demanded that sensitive details be revealed to families before being made public.
But human rights organizations have raised sharp objections. The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel warns that the special military court, with its modified rules of evidence and procedure, creates conditions for what amounts to show trials. The group's executive director, Sari Bashi, points to documented cases of torture among Palestinian detainees held on suspicion of involvement in the October 7 attacks. "Government coalition members have made it clear that they expect mass executions to result from this court that they've established," Bashi said. "We know that Palestinians being held on suspicion of participating in the crimes of October 7 have been tortured, systematically and in a widespread way. My concern is that they are going to be convicted and even executed based on confessions extracted under torture." He acknowledged that those responsible for attacking civilians should face accountability, but insisted the death penalty and the modified legal framework fall short of due process. The Israeli government denies widespread torture allegations, asserting compliance with international law standards.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin described the scale of preparation undertaken to establish the special legal framework. Investigation teams, he said, had reviewed thousands of hours of video, examined vast amounts of evidence, and interrogated captured fighters. Video and audio documentation will be preserved in the State Archives. The court will handle what Levin called "work of an enormous and unprecedented scale." Some hearings are expected to proceed without defendants physically present, a modification that human rights groups say undermines fair trial protections.
In Gaza, a small group of protesters gathered outside the International Committee of the Red Cross headquarters to oppose the death penalty law. Many Gazans remain searching for relatives who either crossed into Israel during the October 2023 attacks or were detained afterward. Hisham al-Wahad, whose brother Haitham, a cameraman, disappeared near the Erez crossing on October 7, called the law cruel. "This law is cruel, it's a law that tries to take away the hope that you're living on," he told the BBC. "We as families of prisoners and families of the missing are calling on states and public opinion—international, Arab and Islamic—to take action to stop such a law and such a matter."
Polls show growing support for capital punishment among Jewish Israelis, particularly regarding Nukhba fighters convicted of terrorism. Yet many bereaved Israeli families say the military tribunal addresses only one piece of a larger reckoning. Carmit Palty Katzir emphasized that focusing solely on prosecuting the attackers leaves unanswered the question of how the assault was possible in the first place, and who bears responsibility for the broader failures. The trials are expected to begin soon, with the world watching a legal process unlike any Israel has conducted before.
Notable Quotes
May everyone see how the State of Israel is a sovereign state which knows how to hold those who harmed it to account— Yulia Malinovsky, opposition co-sponsor of the bill
Palestinians being held on suspicion of participating in the crimes of October 7 have been tortured, systematically and in a widespread way. My concern is that they are going to be convicted and even executed based on confessions extracted under torture— Sari Bashi, executive director of the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the Israeli parliament feel compelled to pass this law now, nearly three years after the attacks?
The immediate trigger was practical—the existing death penalty law passed in March didn't apply retroactively, so there was no legal mechanism to try the October 7 suspects. But there's something deeper. The attacks shattered a sense of security, and the trials are meant to restore it by showing the state can hold attackers accountable in the most final way.
The cross-party support is striking. What does that tell us?
It suggests the attacks transcended normal political divisions. Both government and opposition saw political value in appearing strong on security and justice. It's rare in Israeli politics to see that kind of unanimity, which itself signals how deeply the trauma runs.
The human rights groups are warning about torture-extracted confessions. How credible is that concern?
Very. There's documented evidence of systematic abuse of Palestinian detainees. The concern isn't speculative—it's based on patterns already observed. And the modified court rules make it easier to admit evidence that wouldn't pass muster in a regular trial.
What about the families of the missing? They seem caught between two griefs.
Exactly. They want accountability for the attacks, but they're also desperate for information about relatives who may have been taken or killed. The law doesn't help them. It's focused on punishment, not answers. For them, the trials might provide some closure, but they might also foreclose other avenues of investigation.
The public broadcasting of trials—is that justice or theater?
It's both, and that's the tension. Transparency can serve justice. But when you're broadcasting executions to the world, you're also performing power. The comparison to Eichmann's trial is telling—that was also public, also meant to educate the world. But the stakes here are different, and the legal framework is weaker.
What happens to the 1,283 people currently held without charges?
That's the question no one's fully answering. They'll presumably be sorted into those prosecuted under the new law and those released or held indefinitely. The law doesn't clarify that. It's a gap that will haunt the process.