In many countries, rulers have the power to grant pardons or show clemency, allowing them to override the legal system in special cases. In fact, according to some rabbis, this is a defining characteristic of a bona fide king, and they argue that the fact that a president can also pardon proves that the blessing for royalty should be said when meeting the president. (For more on this, see our article Is There a Blessing Upon Seeing the President?).

But does Judaism actually allow for a Jewish king to override the rule of law and pardon someone who has been found guilty?

The fact is that the scope of the Jewish king’s reach in these areas is actually somewhat limited.

But first, a brief overview of how the Jewish judicial system works.

In ancient Israel, the legal system—governed by Torah law—was divided into two broad jurisdictions: the beit din (rabbinical court, which includes the Sanhedrin, the high court) and the king's jurisdiction.

The Beit Din

The beit din oversees all cases governed by Torah law. The beit din’s authority extends to both religious matters and civil or tort law, reflecting the Torah's holistic view that even seemingly mundane legal disputes are part of one’s divine service. In this framework, civil issues such as property disputes, business dealings, and personal injuries are as much a part of Torah law as religious observances, highlighting the seamless integration of faith and daily life.

In ancient Israel, there was an intricate network of courts. A high court (called the beit din hagadol, “great house of law”) of 71 sages would convene in Jerusalem on the Temple Mount.

There were several courts of 23 judges, which would meet in Israel’s larger cities. Like the great court, these courts were authorized to administer monetary rulings, as well as corporal and capital punishments.

In small communities (comprising less than 120 adult males), there were courts of just three (or more, provided the number remained odd), which were not authorized to administer corporal or capital punishments.

For more on this, see: What Is a Beit Din?

The King’s Jurisdiction

The king’s jurisdiction operates alongside Torah law but serves a distinct purpose: maintaining social order and public welfare. This authority allows the king to address situations where a beit din cannot secure a conviction under Torah law's stringent procedural requirements, yet releasing the offender would threaten the stability and moral fabric of society.

A classic example involves a murderer against whom the evidence is inconclusive, who was not forewarned before committing the act, or who was observed by only one witness. In such situations, the king is empowered to impose justice, including execution, to uphold societal order according to the needs of the time.

The king may even impose severe measures that the beit din does not impose, such as executing multiple offenders in a single day, hanging their bodies publicly, and leaving them displayed for extended periods. These actions aim to instill fear, deter further wrongdoing, and weaken the influence of evildoers in society.1

The King’s Pardon

In terms of the ability to pardon, once the court rules, there is no possibility of a pardon, either from the court or the king himself. When the sentence is from the king, however—whether it was simply for one who rebelled against the king or it was in order to keep social order or the general welfare—then the king may indeed grant a pardon.2

Built-in Clemency for Beit Din

Although there doesn’t seem to be any room for pardons or clemencies for any beit din convictions, the truth is that they are already baked into the judicial process.

On the one hand, the Torah instructs that “you shall commit no injustice in judgment; you shall not favor a poor person nor respect a great man; you shall judge your fellow with righteousness.”3 In other words, a court is enjoined to uphold the law regardless of the status of the person being judged, and nothing—including the king—is permitted to stand in the way of the court fulfilling its duties.

At the same time, when it comes to sentencing someone to corporeal or capital punishment in the first place, the court is enjoined to seek merit, retrying the case even a hundred times if any possible evidence to exonerate the person surfaces.

Furthermore, taking capital punishment as an example, it's extremely difficult to actually impose the death penalty in Jewish law.

Firstly, circumstantial evidence won't cut it; you need two impeccable witnesses who observed the person transgressing an act punishable by death. Next, these two witnesses have to have warned the person of the capital punishment he could receive for doing the prohibited act, even if he already knew. Finally, the person must have committed the transgression immediately after the warning. Any hesitation and the death penalty is off the table. The same applies to other forms of punishment.

In fact, according to the medieval sage known as the Ran (Nissim ben Reuven, 1290–1376), one of the reasons the king adjudicates laws (which is seemingly the purview of the rabbinical courts) is so that criminals are not able to take advantage of the high bar for convictions in Torah law.4

So, perhaps counter-intuitively, the king cannot grant clemency, for that is baked into the job of the court. The king’s job, on the contrary, is to uphold the law and social order.