{"id":11075,"date":"2025-12-29T09:13:52","date_gmt":"2025-12-29T07:13:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.abitbol-associes.com\/?p=11075"},"modified":"2025-12-29T09:21:05","modified_gmt":"2025-12-29T07:21:05","slug":"initiative-legislative-unique-une-lueur-despoir-pour-les-juifs-de-la-diaspora","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.abitbol-associes.com\/en\/initiative-legislative-unique-une-lueur-despoir-pour-les-juifs-de-la-diaspora\/","title":{"rendered":"Unique Legislative Initiative \u2013 A Ray of Hope for Jews in the Diaspora"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\"\"In the face of the alarming resurgence of antisemitism worldwide, and particularly in European countries, the law firm ABITBOL & ASSOCIATES<\/strong> is leading a legislative initiative in cooperation with the Minister of Diaspora Affairs, Mr. Amichai Shikli, and the Minister of Justice, Mr. Yariv Levin, with the aim of filling a legal vacuum.
The proposed bill seeks to amend the Criminal Procedure Code in order to allow Israeli courts to try, even in the absence of the accused, perpetrators of murders and hate crimes committed against Jews abroad.<\/p>\n

\n

A Legislative Gap and the Need to Reform Existing Law<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Currently, Section 13(b)(2) of the Penal Law provides that Israeli law applies to offenses committed against Jews worldwide on the basis of their Jewish identity:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIsraeli criminal law shall also apply to offenses committed abroad against the life, bodily integrity, health, freedom, or property of a Jew, by reason of the fact that he or she is Jewish.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

However, Section 126 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1982) in principle prohibits holding a criminal trial in the absence of the accused:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cNo person shall be tried in criminal proceedings except in his or her presence.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This results in an internal contradiction: on the one hand, Israeli criminal law applies to crimes committed against Jews abroad; on the other hand, it is impossible to try an accused person in absentia.
This contradiction is particularly problematic when the crime is committed in a country that does not extradite its nationals, such as France, where the murderers of Jews effectively benefit from near immunity with respect to the application of Israeli law.<\/p>\n

\n

The Sarah Halimi Case (z”l)<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The need to reform the law was further underscored by the Sarah Halimi case (z”l), in which the court recognized both the antisemitic nature of the acts and the existence of aggravating circumstances. However, the perpetrator, Kobili Traor\u00e9, was not referred to a Criminal Court in France, having been declared unfit to stand trial on the grounds of \u201ccriminal irresponsibility\u201d due to drug consumption\u2014despite the fact that he had voluntarily placed himself under the influence of substances prohibited under French law in order to commit the crime.<\/p>\n

Following this case, France adopted Law No. 2022-52 on January 24, 2022, introducing Article 122-1-1 into the Penal Code, which distinguishes between natural mental disorders and disorders voluntarily induced by the consumption of psychoactive substances.
Nevertheless, a difficulty arises with respect to the fourth criterion of the law: proving the intent to commit the offense renders its application practically impossible. How can one distinguish between innocent consumption and voluntary consumption when the perpetrator regularly uses narcotics?<\/p>\n

\n

Key Provisions of the Bill and Its Scope<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The law firm ABITBOL & ASSOCIATES<\/strong> approached Ministers Shikli and Levin to propose a substantial amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code, introducing Article 128a, which would allow a trial in absentia provided that three cumulative conditions are met:<\/p>\n