Of course. Here is a detailed news article based on the information provided, written in the requested style and format.

---

'A vaccine against murder'? Israel split over return of death penalty

A deeply contentious bill proposing the death penalty for convicted terrorists is advancing through Israel's parliament, igniting a fierce national debate that cuts to the core of the country's legal, moral, and political identity. The legislation, a cornerstone campaign promise of the far-right parties in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition, has become a flashpoint in the escalating culture war between the government and its opponents.

The bill's chief proponent, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, has championed it as a necessary deterrent—a "vaccine against murder" in a state reeling from a wave of deadly attacks.

However, critics, including legal experts, security officials, and opposition lawmakers, warn that the move is not only ineffective and counterproductive but also a calculated political maneuver designed to escalate a conflict with Israel's Supreme Court.

The Proposed Law

The legislation passed its preliminary reading in the Knesset in March and is now being prepared for further votes. While its final form is subject to change, the initial proposal lays out a dramatic shift in Israeli jurisprudence.

• The Core Change: The bill would add the death penalty as a possible sentence for the crime of "murder with a terrorist motive." It aims to make it easier for military courts to impose the sentence with a simple majority of judges, rather than the unanimous decision currently required.

• Intended Scope: The law is specifically aimed at individuals who commit a nationalist or racist-motivated murder with the goal of harming the State of Israel and the revival of the Jewish people in their homeland.

• Current Law: Capital punishment is technically legal in Israel but has been used only once under civilian law, for the execution of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in 1962. While military law applicable in the occupied West Bank permits the death penalty, it has never been carried out.

The Push for Capital Punishment

The government's push for the death penalty is rooted in the ideology of its most hardline members and fueled by a recent surge in violence. Proponents argue it serves multiple purposes beyond simple retribution.

• Deterrence: The primary public argument is that the threat of execution will deter potential attackers in a way that a life sentence—which could end in a prisoner swap—does not.

• Preventing Prisoner Swaps: Supporters of the bill frequently point to past deals where Israel released hundreds of convicted militants in exchange for captive soldiers or their remains. They argue that executing terrorists would prevent them from being used as future bargaining chips.

• Justice for Victims: For many on the right, and particularly for the families of terror victims, the death penalty is seen as the only just punishment for heinous acts of violence.

A Wall of Opposition

Despite the government's resolve, the bill faces formidable opposition from a broad cross-section of Israeli society, including those within the security establishment—the very people tasked with fighting terrorism.

• Security Concerns: Numerous former heads of the Shin Bet (Israel's internal security agency) and senior military officials have publicly stated that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent. They warn it could instead incite revenge attacks, turn convicted terrorists into martyrs, and complicate efforts to gather intelligence.

• Legal and Moral Objections: Israel's Attorney General, Gali Baharav-Miara, has expressed strong opposition, stating the law would not achieve its stated goal of deterrence and raises significant constitutional issues. Many Israelis, both religious and secular, harbor deep moral reservations about state-sanctioned killing.

• International Fallout: Critics caution that reinstating the death penalty would align Israel with countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia, severely damage its standing among Western democracies, and potentially expose Israeli officials and soldiers to prosecution in international courts.

The Deeper Political Game

For many observers, the death penalty debate is inextricably linked to the government's larger, and even more controversial, plan to overhaul the judicial system. Opposition lawmakers suggest the bill is a strategic tool intended to provoke a constitutional crisis.

This view was articulated by Aida Touma-Suleiman, a member of the Knesset from the opposition Hadash-Ta'al party. She argues the bill creates a no-lose scenario for Ben-Gvir and his allies.

"It's a win-win situation for Ben Gvir and his party to promote such a law. Because if this law actually passes, it's for their constituency," Touma-Suleiman explained. "If he managed to pass it then I'm sure the Supreme Court will ask the Knesset to cancel the law, and he can start to say with the rest of the right-wing: 'You see they want to run the country when we are the ones who are elected!'"

This strategy allows the government to leverage a potential Supreme Court intervention against the death penalty bill as "proof" that the judiciary is overstepping its bounds, thereby fueling public support for their plan to strip the court of its powers.

What's Next

The path to enacting the death penalty is long and fraught with political and legal hurdles.

• Legislative Process: The bill must still pass three more readings in the Knesset and survive intense debate in parliamentary committees, where its text could be significantly altered.

• Coalition Cohesion: While the bill is a priority for the far-right, it may face softer opposition from more moderate elements within Netanyahu's own Likud party who are wary of the domestic and international consequences.

• The Judicial Battleground: If the law is passed, it is almost certain to be challenged at the Supreme Court. The court's ruling will be a landmark moment, testing the fragile balance of power between Israel's branches of government and potentially triggering the very constitutional crisis that many believe the bill is designed to ignite.