The gold noose-shaped pins worn on Monday by Otzma Yehudit MKs were impossible to miss. Nearly identical in size and color to the yellow hostage pins that came to represent Israel’s demand to bring its abducted citizens home, they stood out sharply in committee footage. But while the yellow pin symbolized the fight for life, the noose pin did the exact opposite: It advertised the celebration of death as legislation.
This display accompanied the latest push in the National Security Committee to advance a bill that would dramatically expand Israel’s use of the death penalty. The proposal, submitted by Otzma MK Limor Son Har-Melech and others, seeks to impose a mandatory death sentence on any terrorist who intentionally or with “indifference” causes the death of an Israeli civilian out of “hostility toward the public” or from a nationalist motive.
As in, the push isn't by the committee, it's happening in the committee.
It would apply both in Israel and in West Bank military courts, where the bill explicitly lowers the bar for imposing the sentence – allowing a regular majority of military judges to hand it down, rather than requiring unanimity. It also blocks the ability to reduce or commute the sentence, once imposed.
For a country that has used the death penalty only once in its history – the Eichmann case – this is not a small shift. It is a legal, diplomatic, and ethical overhaul packaged into a single vote.
Which is why the optics on Monday were so jarring.
One Israeli hostage, Ran Gvili, remains in Gaza. For his family, the yellow pin is a symbol of a promise Israel has not yet fulfilled. Replacing it with a decorative noose at this moment doesn’t project strength. It projects a willingness to trade moral clarity for political theater. Wearing a noose pin is a public celebration of death, something we have come to expect from our enemies, not from Israeli leaders.
And the political context is hard to ignore. With elections nearing, the urge to produce dramatic, camera-friendly symbols is strong. The noose pin fits neatly into that pattern. It guarantees media attention and reinforces ideological branding, without forcing anyone to answer the harder questions about deterrence, prosecution, or security.
'Very few democracies maintain mandatory death penalties,' expert warns
Meanwhile, the substance of the bill itself raised alarms across the committee. Prof. Amichai Cohen of the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) outlined the international context plainly: “Very few democracies maintain mandatory death penalties. Research shows they increase wrongful acquittals and undermine checks and balances.”
Attorney Gil Shapira from the Public Defender’s Office warned of the legal consequences: “This legislation introduces deep inequalities between jurisdictions and removes safeguards that prevent irreversible errors.”
And Prof. Hagai Levine, chair of the Israel Association of Public Health Physicians, stressed the broader harm: “Global research shows the death penalty increases violence and worsens public health outcomes. This bill will harm Israeli society.”
These were not ideological objections; they were professional, evidence-based warnings. Should the bill advance, it is due to face steep legal challenges.
The response from National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir was to dismiss them outright. “What are you even doing here? Public health for terrorists?” he shouted at Levine. “Would you say it hurt public health to execute Hitler?”
It was a revealing moment: The purpose was not debate but drama.
Even the Knesset’s adviser to the committee, Ido Ben-Yitzhak, cautioned, “This law changes world-order norms. The public must understand its implications.” He noted the significant diplomatic and operational consequences for the IDF, which would become responsible for carrying out executions in the West Bank under an unprecedented legal framework.
But those details – the ones that actually matter – were drowned out by the spectacle.
And that is the core problem. Instead of grappling with the complex challenge of prosecuting October 7 perpetrators effectively, instead of strengthening Israel’s legal, diplomatic, and security structures, the conversation slid toward symbolism designed for a headline, not for reality.
Israel is still missing one of its own. Families are still living with the aftermath of the worst attack in the country’s history. The work ahead requires precision, seriousness, and discipline. A gold noose pin offers none of that. It does not bring Ran Gvili home. It does not deter terrorism. It does not strengthen the rule of law.
It is an accessory, in the very place where we need accountability.