Introduction
I don’t usually write about legislation. My usual territory is neural networks, Bayesian methods, and the occasional rant about European tech sovereignty. But some things cut through everything else. Some things demand that you stop what you’re doing and say something. This is one of those things.
On March 30, 2026, the Israeli Knesset passed a law making the death penalty the default sentence for Palestinians convicted in military courts of deadly attacks (The Times of Israel 2026). Not Israeli citizens. Not settlers. Palestinians. Exclusively.
Let me say that again so it lands. A state passed a law that imposes the death penalty on people based on who they are. Not what they did. Who they are.
I’m writing this because the Party of European Socialists (Party of European Socialists 2026) and the S&D Group in the European Parliament (Socialists and Democrats 2026) have condemned this law and called for the immediate suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. I support that condemnation fully. And I think you should too.
What the Law Actually Does
Let’s be precise about what we’re talking about, because the details matter.
The law, pushed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, makes execution the default sentence for Palestinians convicted of deadly attacks (Al Jazeera 2026c). But here’s where it gets truly ugly.
Israeli citizens and settlers are explicitly excluded from military court jurisdiction. They get tried in civilian courts, with civilian protections, civilian appeals processes, and civilian legal standards. Palestinians face military tribunals. Two populations. Two completely different legal systems. One land.
The procedural provisions are staggering:
- Execution must be carried out within 90 days. Ninety days. That’s three months from conviction to death, with severely limited time for appeals.
- Access to legal counsel is restricted.
- Family visits are restricted.
- Judicial discretion is gutted. Judges can only impose a life sentence instead of death in vague “exceptional cases.”
- Sentence commutation is prohibited entirely.
- Execution personnel receive legal immunity.
These provisions are documented in detail by Human Rights Watch (Human Rights Watch 2026).
Now, consider this in context. The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem has documented that military trials of Palestinians carry an approximately 96% conviction rate. Ninety-six percent. Based largely on confessions extracted under duress and torture.
So what we’re looking at is a system where Palestinians are tried in military courts with a near-certain conviction rate, based on coerced confessions, with a mandatory death sentence, with almost no appeals window, and no possibility of commutation. And this system applies to Palestinians and Palestinians alone.
That’s not a justice system. That’s an apparatus.
The International Response
Credit where it’s due. The international community has not been silent on this one.
UN human rights experts condemned the law as constituting a “discriminatory regime of capital punishment” that “manifestly violates Israel’s obligations under international human rights law” (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights 2026). They called for its immediate repeal.
Human Rights Watch was characteristically direct. Their deputy Middle East director stated: “Israeli officials argue that imposing the death penalty is about security, but in reality, it entrenches discrimination and a two-tiered system of justice, both hallmarks of apartheid” (Human Rights Watch 2026).
Apartheid. That’s not a word thrown around lightly by Human Rights Watch. When they use it, they mean it in the precise legal sense.
France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom have all raised concerns (Al Jazeera 2026a). Amnesty International has called for urgent EU measures (Amnesty International 2026).
And the Party of European Socialists (Party of European Socialists 2026), along with the S&D Group in the European Parliament, have taken the strongest institutional European stance. They’ve called for the immediate suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Yannis Maniatis, the S&D Group’s vice-president for foreign affairs, put it plainly: “Reintroducing the death penalty is a step back into the past and yet another blow to the values that underpin our partnership with Israel. We cannot and will not remain silent. When a partner repeatedly ignores the warnings from its friends and civil society alike, there must be consequences” (Socialists and Democrats 2026).
The S&D described the law as a “grave democratic regression.” I’d call it something worse, but that framing carries weight in the European institutional context where it matters most.
Why This Should Concern You Personally
I know what some of you might be thinking. “This is terrible, but what does it have to do with me? I’m a software engineer in Stockholm (or Berlin, or Copenhagen, or wherever).”
Here’s why it concerns you.
The EU-Israel Association Agreement, which governs trade and political relations between Europe and Israel, contains an Article 2. That article conditions the entire agreement on respect for human rights and democratic principles. It’s not decorative language. It’s a legal obligation. And every time the EU fails to enforce it, that article becomes more meaningless. Not just for Israel. For every agreement the EU signs with every partner.
When Europe trades with a state that institutes ethnically targeted death penalty laws and does nothing, it sends a message. That message is: our values are negotiable. Our principles are for show. And that message weakens the foundations of the European project itself.
Over 9,300 Palestinians are currently detained in Israeli prisons, reportedly experiencing torture, starvation, and medical neglect (Al Jazeera 2026b). This new law doesn’t exist in isolation. It’s the sharpest edge of a system that has been documented and condemned by virtually every major human rights organization on the planet.
As Europeans, we are connected to this. Our governments maintain diplomatic and trade relationships with Israel. Our tax money flows into institutions that could act but choose not to. Our silence is a form of participation.
What You Can Do
I’m not interested in writing posts that make people feel bad and then give them nothing to do with that feeling. Outrage without action is just entertainment. So here’s what you can actually do.
Contact your elected representatives. If you’re in the EU, write to your MEPs. Tell them you support the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement under Article 2. Be specific. Name the law. Name the article. MEPs pay attention to constituent mail more than you’d think, especially when it’s specific and informed. You can find your MEPs at the European Parliament’s website and most of them have public email addresses.
Support the organizations doing the work. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, B’Tselem, and the Palestinian human rights organization Al-Haq are all on the ground documenting what’s happening. They need funding. Even small amounts matter. These organizations are the reason we have the documented facts I cited in this post.
Demand your government takes a position. France, Germany, Italy, and the UK have “raised concerns.” Concerns are not enough. Push for your government to take concrete diplomatic action. Recall ambassadors. Suspend arms sales. Support referrals to the International Criminal Court. Diplomatic language is designed to sound like action while being none. Don’t let them get away with it.
Amplify Palestinian voices. Palestinians have been telling the world about these systems for decades. Organizations like the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Addameer (the prisoner support organization), and Defence for Children International Palestine document these realities daily. Follow them. Share their work. Let the people most affected by this law be heard.
Talk about it. I know this sounds simple, but social pressure is real. Bring it up with friends, colleagues, at dinner. Not to lecture. Just to make it visible. The machinery of oppression relies on people looking away. The single most subversive thing you can do is refuse to look away.
Make purchasing decisions that reflect your values. Look into which companies operate in or profit from the occupation. There are well-documented guides from organizations like the BDS movement. You don’t have to agree with every position to use the information to make informed choices about where your money goes.
A Note on Courage
I spent years in the Swedish Navy special operations. One thing that experience burned into me is that courage isn’t the absence of risk. It’s the decision that something matters more than the risk.
Speaking up about this carries social risk. I know that. People will disagree. Some will be angry. Some will call this post one-sided.
But here’s what I know. When a state passes a law that imposes death on people based on their ethnicity, tried in courts with a 96% conviction rate based on coerced confessions, with 90 days to execution and no possibility of commutation, there is no “other side” that makes this acceptable. There is no framing that makes this compatible with basic human rights.
The PES and the S&D Group understood this. The UN human rights experts understood this. Human Rights Watch understood this. It’s time the rest of us acted like we understood it too.
Conclusion
This law is not an abstract policy debate. It is a concrete, operational framework for state-sanctioned killing along ethnic lines. Every major human rights institution in the world has said so. The question is whether we’re going to treat that consensus as something that demands action, or something we scroll past.
Europe has a particular responsibility here. We have the institutional mechanisms (the Association Agreement, the European Parliament, our diplomatic weight) to exert real pressure. The PES and S&D have pointed the way. The question is whether the rest of European leadership will follow.
I don’t have all the answers. I’m a physicist who builds AI systems, not a diplomat. But I know this: when something is clearly, unambiguously wrong, the people who said nothing are remembered just as well as the people who did it.
Speak up. Act. Don’t look away.