The Knesset House Committee on Tuesday debated a bill proposal to expel family members of terrorists if the family member “knew ahead of time about his plan to commit an act of terror, expressed support or identified with the act of terror, or published praise, sympathy, or encouraged an act of terror.”
The bill, which is being prepared for its second and third readings, gives the responsibility to the interior minister, who can, after holding an arraignment, expel the family member “outside of Israel or the territories it controls.”
After passing its preliminary reading in February, the bill was significantly amended in order to solve significant legal problems. However, after the amended version passed its first reading, Knesset Home Committee chairman Ofir Katz (Likud) announced on October 8 that the wording would return to its original wording due to “disagreements” with Justice Ministry officials over the final version.
Knesset Legal Adviser Sagit Afik said that the bill had constitutional and practical problems. From a constitutional standpoint, the bill imposed severe penalties on family members without a trial, which is more severe than the punishment meted out to the perpetrator of the terror act, who could face jail time but not expulsion. The bill also failed to specify the decision-making process for the interior minister, which could potentially involve an advisory committee.
Practically speaking, the bill did not specify where and how to expel the family members, who would carry out the expulsion, or the duration of the expulsion. Afik also pointed out that the bill did not include a rescinding of the family member’s citizenship, and therefore he or she would retain full civil rights even if not physically in the country.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (Otzma Yehudit) said that the bill was “historic” and that after it is accepted, every terrorist will “think one thousand times” before committing the act of terror.
At one point during the meeting, Ben-Gvir and Ahmad Tibi (Hadash-Ta’al) engaged in a shouting match, in which each accused the other of supporting terror.
Katz said at the meeting that prior Supreme Court hearings on the matter had “family members of terrorists exiting smiling and bereaved families exiting crying.” This has led to a deterioration of public trust in the Supreme Court, he argued.
MK Hanoch Milvetsky addresses bill
Hanoch Milwidsky (Likud), who proposed the bill alongside a number of other MKs, said that the bill had “slowly been castrated” and, therefore, had returned to its original version. Asked whether it would apply to Jewish terrorists, Milwidsky answered that there are none.
The legal representative of the justice ministry, Nadav Golani, said that the security consequences of the bill required discussion in Israel’s National Security Council, as well as a discussion on its potential consequences on Israel’s international standing. Coalition MKs repeatedly disrupted Golani and accused justice ministry officials of intentionally tripping up the bill for ideological or political reasons. The MKs did not provide support for their claim.
Almog Cohen (Otzma Yehudit), one of the proposers of the law, said on Tuesday morning that the bill would be “fast-tracked” through the Knesset and is expected to pass into law by the end of October. Cohen said that if the High Court of Justice strikes down the bill, it will lead to a “constitutional crisis.”