Standing Against Ben Gvir’s Yom Kippur Death Wish
Just hours before the start of Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year in the Jewish calendar, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir raised the possibility of applying the death penalty to a person whom the Jerusalem Post described as responsible for the attack in Neve Tzuf, an Israeli settlement in the West Bank, during a security meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The thousands of members of our group “L’chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty” from across Israel, the United States and the world, wholeheartedly condemn both this monstrous act of terror, and Ben G’vir’s politically-motivated bloodlust.
The horrific West Bank terrorist attack in question occurred on September 20, 2026. It resulted in the heinous murder of Alei Zahav resident Netanel Shukrun, Zichrono Livracha (of blessed memory), a 36-year-old father of six. The loss that his loved ones have experienced is unfathomable. May they have all the support needed now to grieve in peace, surrounded by chizuk v’nichum – strength and comfort – from their beloved community.
The terrorist had reportedly shot at the group of Israelis from a red Mitsubishi SUV with Palestinian Authority license plates. He then exited the vehicle armed and fled the scene on foot before later being apprehended by the IDF’s Duvdevan undercover counterterrorism unit. Even before the terrorist’s capture, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir had affirmed that he should not be killed during the manhunt, stating instead that “he belongs on the gallows,” in accordance with the Death Penalty for Terrorists Law.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanhayu reportedly convened a meeting on Sunday, in response to the security situation in the West Bank after the attack that occurred the same day. In that meeting, which took place just two hours before the start of Yom Kippur, Ben Gvir raised the issue of the death penalty in this case. At the conclusion of the security meeting, the limited cabinet decided to schedule an additional meeting that would include the Military Advocate-General, who was not present at the Sunday meeting. The follow-up will aim to examine the relevant legal and procedural aspects of........
