Israel’s Knesset has passed a death penalty law targeting Palestinians convicted of lethal attacks. It is the first country to introduce capital punishment in the 21st century. The law was championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
What distinguishes this legislation from other capital punishment statutes around the world is its specificity. It does not apply to all citizens equally. It applies to Palestinians. Israeli citizens who commit identical acts face different legal consequences under different statutes.
In the same week, Israel announced its intention to maintain permanent military control over parts of southern Lebanon and issued evacuation orders pressuring Christian and Druze community leaders to expel their Shiite neighbors. The New York Times headline was direct: ‘Israel’s Message to a Broad Swath of Lebanon: Shiites Must Go.’
When a state passes a law that imposes the ultimate penalty on one ethnic group but not another, there is a term for that in international law. When the same state simultaneously demands the removal of a religious group from a neighboring territory, the pattern becomes harder to describe as anything other than what it appears to be.
The international response has been muted. The Iran war has consumed the diplomatic bandwidth that might otherwise be directed at scrutinizing these developments. Whether that timing is coincidental is a question that answers itself.
Legal scholars at the International Criminal Court have noted that discriminatory application of capital punishment can constitute a crime against humanity under the Rome Statute. Whether the ICC will act on that assessment is another matter entirely — one that depends on political will that has been conspicuously absent.
