Case Number
HCJ 5100/94 , HCJ 4054/95, HCJ 6536/95 , HCJ 5188/96, HCJ 7563/97, HCJ 7628/97, HCJ 1043/99
Date Decided
9-6-1999
Decision Type
Original
Document Type
Full Opinion
Abstract
Facts: In its investigations, the General Security Service makes use of methods that include subjecting suspects to moderate physical pressure. The means are employed under the authority of directives. These directives allow for the use of moderate physical pressure if such pressure is immediately necessary to save human life. Petitioners challenge the legality of these methods.
Held: The Court held that the GSS did not have the authority employ certain methods challenged by the petitioners. The Court also held that the “necessity defense,” found in the Israeli Penal Law, could serve to ex ante allow GSS investigators to employ such interrogation practices. The Court's decision did not negate the possibility that the “necessity defense” would be available post factum to GSS investigators—either in the choice made by the Attorney-General in deciding whether to prosecute, or according to the discretion of the court if criminal charges are brought were brought against them.
Petition denied.
Keywords
International Law -- Laws of war, International Law -- Treaties