Execution Law for Prisoners and Closure of Al-Aqsa: Israeli Escalation Puts the Nation Before Its Historical Responsibilities

The Palestinian issue is currently facing a dangerous and unprecedented turning point, as the Israeli occupation seeks to impose a new reality that targets both people and holy sites. Coinciding with the continued tightening and closure of Al-Aqsa Mosque, the Knesset approved in a first reading a law allowing the execution of Palestinian prisoners, in a move that reflects the desire of the far-right to settle political scores through military judicial platforms.

This legislation, pushed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, is not merely a legal procedure; it is a declaration of war on thousands of prisoners held in jails. According to the data, the law allows military courts to issue death sentences by a simple majority, which opens the door to systematic killings under a flimsy legal cover.

Historically, the occupation authorities have resorted to applying the death penalty only in very rare cases, most notably against the Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann in the 1960s. Today, the occupation is trying to revive this punishment against Palestinians who resist the occupation, in an attempt to break the will of popular steadfastness and intimidate the popular base of the resistance.

Historically and in the Islamic conscience, the issue of prisoners has never been merely a transient humanitarian file; rather, it is a measure of the nation's dignity and strength. History has recorded decisive stances in which armies moved to rescue a single prisoner, as happened during the era of Caliph Al-Mu'tasim, who dispatched an entire army in response to the cry of a Hashemite woman in Amorium.

The established Sharia rules affirm the obligation to rise up to rescue prisoners, as jurists considered the sanctity of a Muslim to be greater than the sanctity of lands. Scholars of the nation believe that ransoming prisoners is a religious duty that falls on everyone, and if official resources are insufficient, then it is incumbent upon the entire nation to contribute to freeing them from bondage and oppression.

In light of the presence of about ten thousand Palestinian prisoners, including women and children who are subjected to systematic torture, the international and regional silence seems reprehensible. The absence of an appropriate reaction to this great crime encourages the occupation to proceed with its abusive policies that no longer differentiate between a child or an elder inside the cells.

Observers link the law on the execution of prisoners with what is happening in the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque, including continuous closures and incursions. The closure of the mosque is nothing but preparation for something more severe, as extremists in the occupation government seek to impose a complete temporal and spatial division, exploiting the world's preoccupation with regional and international conflicts.

The American position, which considered the execution legislation a 'sovereign right' for Israel, reflects a complete bias that gives the green light for more violations. In contrast, international organizations content themselves with statements of condemnation that are neither sufficient nor satisfying in the face of the aggression of the Israeli far-right, whose leaders celebrate the approval of killing laws.

The experiences of conflict have taught us that the occupation only retreats under real and tangible pressure, whether political or on the ground. The nation possesses many pressure cards, starting from popular movements in the squares to diplomatic and economic stances that can force the occupation to reconsider its calculations.

Here, the role of scholars and thinkers stands out in guiding the compass towards true responsibilities, away from routine statements that no longer affect the reality on the ground. The sincere fatwa is what places rulers and ruled before their duties towards Al-Aqsa and the prisoners, and clarifies that neglecting either of them is a neglect of the core of faith and identity.

The extremist minister who celebrated by distributing sweets after the vote on the execution law will not hesitate to commit greater follies in Jerusalem. Therefore, defending prisoners is essentially defending Al-Aqsa Mosque, and vice versa, as both represent the symbolism of Palestinian steadfastness in the face of the Israeli war machine.

Recalling the spirit of historical heroism in dealing with prisoner issues has become an urgent necessity in the current reality. Nations that respect their individuals are those that stake their future on the safety of every individual within them, and the occupation is well aware of this point and tries to exploit it to pressure Palestinians and blackmail their political positions.

In conclusion, the reliance remains on the awareness of peoples and their ability to act to protect their holy sites and their children behind bars. The execution law for prisoners must be a wake-up call for the entire nation, that silence is no longer an acceptable option in the face of a threat that directly and explicitly targets lives and holy sites.

The sky, which is hoped for when it is veiled, will one day rain down victory and relief for these heroes who sacrificed the prime of their youth for the dignity of this nation. Everyone must realize that rescuing a prisoner is an individual obligation by collective capabilities, and that failure to do so is a sin in which everyone who possessed a means of change and did not use it participates.

Rescuing a prisoner is an obligation upon the nation with all its capabilities; if it fails or retreats, everyone sins, so what if among these prisoners is the journey of our noble Prophet?