Complicity by Silence? Evaluating New Zealand’s Response to Israel’s Death Penalty Law under International Law
BY Gloria Zhang & MillA Rose Klausen
I Introduction
From the weaponisation of starvation and obstruction of aid, to the bombing of civilians and most recently, the prospect of an ethnically targeted death penalty. Where do we, as a country, draw the line? With the passing of the March 2026 Israeli legislation known as the Death Penalty for Terrorist Law, this question becomes increasingly urgent.
This legislation will allow the Israeli military courts that occupy the West Bank to impose the death penalty, hanging Palestinians convicted of murdering Israeli citizens with the intent of undermining the state. Critics argue that the legislation is not only a profound moral wrong, but a violation of human rights, as it directly targets Palestinians, making it a form of institutionalised discrimination.[1] Challenging a state such as Israel, which yields great power, is not an easy task. However, when violations of international human rights law become so extreme, it raises concerns about whether New Zealand should take a stronger stand.
Firstly, this article will provide the historical context of the Israel-Palestine conflict before examining the legislation in detail. Finally, we will explore the role of New Zealand’s government and its civilians within the conflict.
II A Brief History
The conflict between Palestine and Israel first began in World War I with the British taking control over previously Ottoman-occupied Palestine, whilst simultaneously pledging to establish a home for Jewish people, which triggered Jewish immigration. During World War II as a result of persecution, the Jewish population rose from 10 per cent to over 30 per cent in 1947.[2]
The Palestinian revolt of 1936 arose in response to British rule and the rapid pace of Jewish immigration into the region. To ease tension, the United Nations (UN) passed Resolution 181 in 1947, partitioning Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, with the Jewish population receiving 55 per cent of the land.[3] In the lead up to the establishment of Israel in 1948, a mass displacement of Palestinians occurred, referred to as the Nakba, whereby Zionist militias (supporters of a Jewish national state within palestine),[4] ethnically cleansed more than 750,000 Palestinians from their homes.[5] A further 300,000 were displaced within the Six-Day War of 1967,[6] in which Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem, a move considered unlawful under international law.
The period of 1993–1995 saw an attempt at peace between the two states through the Oslo Accords, yet regrettably this was short lived. From 1993, there were ongoing issues with settler violence, the Gaza blockade and continued conflict. In 2023, Hamas, the Islamic militant group that has controlled the Gaza strip (one of the two Palestinian territories) for nearly two decades,[7] launched an attack on Israel, triggering a devastating military campaign throughout the strip.[8] Since then, the death toll has exceeded 75,000 in Gaza. Israel continues to contest proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which has issued measures requiring Israel to use all their power to prevent acts of genocides against Palestinians, leaving the future of the Palestinian people very unclear.
III The Legislation
The Death Penalty for Terrorists Law was passed by Israeli Lawmakers on 30 March 2026, enabling death by hanging. The legislation was adopted through accelerated legislative procedures, with a majority vote of 62 to 48, consequently allowing the legislation to be passed, expanding their capital punishment and being one of the only democracies to do so in years.[9]
The purpose of the legislation is to impose a death penalty on individuals in the West Bank of Palestine who are found guilty of committing a terrorist act towards a resident of Israel, with the intention of rejecting the existence of the State of Israel.[10] Although the legislation is not directly targeted towards Palestinians, the legislation has been constructed to disproportionately target these individuals. The legislation aims to speed up the murder of Palestinians by implementing a 90-day death penalty from the day of the final ruling. This means that once issued, a sentence cannot be reduced or removed, and must be carried out within those 90 days. In comparison to the United States, death penalty inmates generally spend a decade after sentencing waiting for their execution, and have the opportunity to overturn and appeal their sentence. Thus, the impact of such a bill weighs significantly greater compared to other countries who have the death penalty implemented in their legislation. Although this bill will not apply retroactively, its impacts cannot be denied. Palestinians accused of the crime are denied legal representation and family visits, significantly infringing on their human rights and reducing scrutiny as well asexternal oversight. The implications of this are exemplified through the Palestinian conviction rate of 96 per cent, which is often built on coerced interrogations.[11]
Primarily sponsored by far-right Jewish powers “Otazma Yehudit”, Netanyahu Likud’s party (the Prime Minister of Israel) and the conservative Yisrael beitenu party, Israeli Officials argued in support of the legislation stating that it would provide security. However, there is no evidence of such a claim and the realities are clearly untrue.
IV Violation of International Law
Under international law, death penalties are to only be imposed for the most serious kinds of offences following fair and careful proceedings, considering pardon or commutation. According to UN Experts, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by Israel in 1961, prohibits mandatory death sentences due to their arbitrary, cruel and inhumane nature.[12] The death penalty can rarely be applied without violating prohibitions of torture, non-discrimination and ill-treatment. However, Israel’s new legislation fails to uphold any of these conditions.
The legislation targets Palestinians, implying a convention where Palestinians are unworthy of legal protection. This exclusive application of the death penalty constitutes a severe discriminatory act which breaches international obligations where all individuals are guaranteed equality under the law. Furthermore, Alice Jill Edwards, the UN special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, warned that this discriminatory application could create irreversible risk of breaching the absolute prohibition of torture. Edwards advises UN nationson issues regarding global torture. The UN special rapporteur stated that capital punishment itself is noted as being incompatible with human dignity. The imposition of such punishment, in combination with convictions rooted in coercion or abuse, exemplifies the fatal nature of this legislation in light of international legal obligations. Edwards calls upon the Israeli Supreme Court to reconsider and repeal the legislation, and review their international obligations.
V New Zealand’s involvement
New Zealand has historically and currently had limited involvement in the conflict. Due to New Zealand’s part in the Commonwealth, it had no choice but to support the British Mandate in 1922. Post-World War II, New Zealand publicly supported Israel’s seizures of Palestinian land, leading to the creation of the separate Gaza and West Bank territories. It has continued to support Israel’s declaration of Independence and statehood despite the Nakba of 1948 and the protests of the New Zealand public against this support. Māori people have been vocal about their distress, with over 10,000 signing the 2023 petition “MĀORI CALL FOR PALESTINE”.[13]
Critics argue that as signatories to the Genocide Convention, New Zealand has failed its obligations by continuing to support Israel even after the ICJ deemed that Israel was committing a genocide. There were pushes for the government to align with countries like South Africa, which took a stronger stance against Israel, taking them to the ICJ in 2023.[14]
New Zealand has offered minimal support to Palestine by donating $50 million in aid, though critics argue this falls short of meaningful engagement. Foreign Minister Winston Peters maintains a two-state solution position. On Israel’s death penalty for terrorism legislation, Peters stated that New Zealand “deeply condemns the death penalty”,[15] a view supported by all parties but one. A Pro-Palestine party subsequently moved a motion expressing concern about the legislation’s deeply inhumane actions and calling for its reversal, mirroring concerns raised by the United Kingdom, Australia and France. The motion received support from half of Parliament, with the remainder silent or opposed.
VI Conclusion
The implications of the Death Penalty for Terrorist Law demonstrate a clear disregard for international human rights law and the international community. Globally, the impacts of such a law are not isolated to Israel and Palestine, and New Zealand has to take a clear position as to where they stand. This requires New Zealand to draw a line and recognise that violations require more than just a mere disapproving statement. If International law is to have any real effect, New Zealand must be willing to play its part in upholding international law consistently. To encourage the government to take a stronger stance against the legislation, members of the public can participate in protests, boycotts and donate to aid organisations. For further information, visit the University of Auckland club, Students’ Justice for Palestine (uoasjp)[16].
[1] UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination "Israel's Discriminatory Death Penalty Law Marks Grave Human Rights Retrogression" (UN Press Release, 1 May 2026).
[2] The Origins and Evolution of the Palestinian Problem: Part II 1947–1977, UN Doc, UNISPAL (1979) at 3.
[3] Mohammed Haddad and Alia Chughtai "Israel-Palestine Conflict: A Brief History in Maps and Charts" (Al Jazeera, 27 November 2023). www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/27/palestine-and-israel-brief-history-maps-and-charts.
[4] NA “Zionism” (19 April 2026) Encyclopaedia Britannica <https://www.britannica.com>.
[5] Haddad and Chughtai, above n 3.
[6] United Nations Committee on the Exercize of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People “1948-2024: The ongoing Nakba” (UN Press Release GA/PAL/1467, 17 May 2024)
[7] Kali Robinson "What is Hamas?" (6 October 2025) Council on Foreign Relations<cfr.org>.
[8] Fatima Al-Kassab "What is the Gaza Strip? Here's What to Know" (10 October 2023) NPR <npr.org>.
[9]Hayley Bedard “Israel Passes Mandatory Death Penalty for Palestinians Convicted of Terrorism, Flouting International Law and Drawing Widespread Condemnation” (17 April 2026) Death Penalty Information Center. <https://deathpenaltyinfo.org>.
[10] Al Jareezza Staff, AFP and The Associated Press “Israel’s Parliament passes death penalty bill targeting palestinians” (30 March 2026 "(“ www.aljazeera.com>.
[11]Tania Kramer “An in-depth look at Israel’s new death penalty law” (30 March 2026) Deutsche Welle <www.dw.com>.
[12] Office of High Commission for Human Rights “New Israeli death Penalty Law risks violating absolute prohibition of torture, says UN Expert” (2 April 2026) <www.ohchr.org>.
[13] "Māori Call for Palestine", 21 November 2023 (OurActionStation) https://our.actionstation.org.nz/petitions/maori-call-for-ceasefire.
[14] Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v Israel) (2023) ICJ No 192.
[15] Lillian Hanly "NZ, Allies Express 'Deep Concern' About Israeli Bill Expanding Death Penalty for Palestinians" RNZ (New Zealand, 2 April 2026) <rnz.co.nz>.
[16] Students for Justice in Palestine UoA "Students for Justice in Palestine UoA" (Instagram, accessed 27 April 2026) <www.instagram.com/uoasjp/>.