The Israeli parliament, the Knesset, recently approved a new law granting the government authority to deport family members of individuals accused of terrorism. This legislation, based on the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (1948) and updated Israeli Security Regulations, applies to both Palestinian residents of occupied areas like East Jerusalem and Israeli citizens, enabling deportations to regions such as the Gaza Strip or other designated locations. This move has drawn scrutiny and sparked debate on its compatibility with fundamental rights, as well as with Israeli Basic Laws, particularly those concerning individual rights and freedoms.
Under this new law, the Minister of Interior can deport first degree relatives parents, siblings, or spouses of alleged terrorists if they are suspected of supporting or failing to disclose information about the accused’s actions. The law provides limited protections for those targeted: individuals have a right to a hearing where they may present a defense, though the minister has only 14 days to finalize deportation decisions. The Citizenship Law and Entry into Israel Law (1952) serve as a legal foundation for the state’s authority over residency and deportation, while recent amendments empower the minister to act swiftly in cases involving national security concerns. Israeli citizens subjected to deportation retain their citizenship, even if expelled from the country.
The law stipulates different deportation durations based on residency status. Israeli citizens face deportation of 7 to 15 years, while legal residents could be subject to removal for 10 to 20 years. However, it remains uncertain if the law’s provisions will extend to residents of the occupied West Bank. Legal experts argue the law may face challenges in Israel’s Supreme Court under Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which guarantees the right to family and personal security. Critics argue that it contravenes constitutional principles prohibiting collective punishment and raises serious questions about family rights and due process under Israeli law.
Additionally, the law introduces a five year temporary provision concerning minors. This amendment, rooted in updated anti-terrorism laws, permits prison sentences for individuals under the age of 14 who are convicted of involvement in terrorist activities or associated with designated terrorist organizations. The measure, which modifies existing juvenile justice standards under Israeli law, has raised concerns about the potential psychological impact on children and whether such measures align with international norms on child rights.
The legislation fits within a broader shift in Israeli policy toward stricter security measures in response to heightened tensions. Recently, the Knesset passed another law limiting the activities of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which offers humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees. Israel justifies these actions by asserting that certain humanitarian agencies may be complicit in supporting terrorism, though these claims have been widely contested. Critics view these laws as moving Israel closer to a legal framework that normalizes administrative and extrajudicial measures for national security, with possible implications for collective punishment under international law.
Despite opposition from certain legal quarters, including the Attorney General’s office, which recommended restricting the law’s scope, advocates of the legislation argue it is essential to protect national security. Key supporters, like National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, contend that these laws will help deter terrorist activities. Nonetheless, human rights organizations warn that such laws risk violating protections against collective punishment, as outlined in Israel’s Basic Laws, and raise concerns over the broader impact on the families and communities involved.
