Former Hostage Eliya Cohen Demands Justice as Death Penalty Bill Advances

As Israel continues to grapple with the trauma of October 7 and its aftermath, voices shaped by direct experience are increasingly shaping the national conversation. One of those voices is Eliya Cohen, a former Gaza hostage, who this week issued a searing call for justice as Israel’s death penalty bill for terrorists moves forward in the Knesset.

In a blunt and emotionally charged statement posted on Instagram, Cohen responded to criticism from Hamas over Israel’s decision to advance legislation allowing capital punishment for convicted terrorists. Hamas claimed the move violates international law. Cohen rejected that claim outright.

“Raping, murdering, smashing heads, desecrating bodies, burning babies, kidnapping civilians, and torturing them 24/7,” Cohen wrote. “Is that not a violation of the international convention?”

Cohen went further, saying that if the death penalty is enacted, hostages themselves should be given “the honor of pressing the button” to carry out sentences against Hamas terrorists. His words reflect not abstract ideology, but the voice of someone who lived under Hamas captivity and survived.

The statement came as the death penalty for terrorists bill continues to advance through parliamentary channels. The legislation, proposed by Otzma Yehudit and led by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, passed its first reading in December and is now being debated in Knesset committee sessions ahead of its second and third readings.

The bill is rooted in a clear premise: that life imprisonment has failed as a deterrent for terrorists who murder Israelis. Its explanatory notes state that capital punishment for acts of murder committed as terrorism is intended to prevent future attacks by raising the cost for perpetrators.

Ben-Gvir has repeatedly framed the bill as a direct response to October 7. In November, he called it “the most important law in the history of the State of Israel,” arguing that terrorists must know there is a final, irreversible consequence for mass murder. “This law will deter them,” he said. “It will make them think a thousand times before carrying out another October 7.”

In January, Ben-Gvir presented a revised outline of the bill to the Knesset National Security Committee, specifying that executions would be carried out by hanging rather than lethal injection. Under the proposal, sentences would be administered by the Israel Prison Service within 90 days of a final court judgment.

Hamas has attempted to frame the legislation as a violation of international law, calling on the United Nations and international courts to intervene. But international law itself tells a more complex story. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not categorically ban the death penalty. Article 6 explicitly permits it in cases of the “most serious crimes,” provided it is imposed by a competent court following due process.

Israel’s proposal, supporters argue, fits squarely within that framework. It applies only to terrorists convicted of murder, requires a final judicial ruling, and is grounded in Israeli law not mob justice or extrajudicial action.

What makes Cohen’s intervention particularly striking is not just its intensity, but its symbolism. For years, international bodies and human rights organizations have spoken about terrorism in abstract terms. Cohen speaks as someone who endured it directly. His message is that moral equivalence has limits, and that those who commit atrocities against civilians cannot endlessly hide behind legal rhetoric while victims are told to remain silent.

The debate over the death penalty bill is far from over. It still requires two additional readings in the Knesset before becoming law, and opposition remains both domestically and abroad. But the direction of travel is clear. Israeli society, shaped by unprecedented brutality, is reassessing old assumptions about deterrence, justice, and moral clarity.

Cohen’s words cut to the heart of that reassessment. This is not about vengeance. It is about restoring consequences in a reality where terrorists celebrated mass murder and expected eventual release.

Israel was founded on the principle that Jewish lives are not expendable and Jewish suffering is not negotiable. As the state debates how to respond to those who sought its destruction, voices like Eliya Cohen’s ensure that the victims are no longer treated as footnotes in legal arguments, but as central moral actors.

Share this article with others following Israel’s fight for justice and security, and subscribe to our newsletter for continued coverage grounded in truth and clarity.