NOVANEWS
Although Israel ratified the UN Convention Against Torture and the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights over twenty years ago, Israeli domestic law still does not comply with the Conventions, and does not include a crime of torture in accordance with the definition contained within the Conventions. In fact, in October 2014, in its concluding observations, the UN Human Rights Committee urged Israel to “explicitly prohibit” torture and ill-treatment (physical and psychological) through legislation, to end of the use of “necessity” as a justification for torture, to end of the use of “moderate physical pressure” as an interrogation method, and to make audio/video recordings of interrogations of security suspects.
Israeli law is not even in line with the Israeli Supreme Court’s ruling prohibiting the use of torture in most circumstances in 1999. The regime surrounding the use of torture – from Israeli domestic law to internal military regulations, the General Security Services, and the prison authorities – is riddled with loopholes that allow for the use of various forms of torture and ill-treatment against Palestinian detainees during interrogation for the purposes of gaining information and extracting confessions.
In an attempt to bring Israeli law into compliance with the state’s international human rights treaty obligations, Adalah is now sending a legislative bill to all Israeli Knesset members that contains the necessary amendments. The bill aims to bring an end to the lack of accountability and impunity currently enjoyed by perpetrators of torture, and to reduce the prevalence of forced confessions.
In addition to more ‘conventional’ forms of torture, the bill also contains a proposed definition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (CIDT) as a crime in law – currently lacking – in line with international law. Examples that would fall within this definition include the ill-treatment of prisoners and detainees during their transport to court hearings or to hospital in prison authority vehicles. During these unnecessarily long trips, prisoners are routinely prevented from relieving themselves, are denied food, and forced to endure extremely uncomfortable physical conditions, even gravely ill individuals. A further example is interrogators’ use of threats of harm against detainees themselves or against members of their families, used to force confessions.
In terms of penalties, the bill imposes a sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment for persons convicted of the crime of torture, which would rise to life imprisonment in cases where the crime results in the death of the detainee. It suggests a seven-year prison sentence for persons convicted of committing CIDT.
Adalah further proposes the formation of a dedicated independent and professional committee to investigate complaints of torture lodged by prisoners and detainees. Such a committee should put an end to the routine failure to investigate complaints due to a supposed ‘lack of public interest.’ The bill states that the government should fund the committee and pay compensation to victims of torture, in accordance with international human rights law.
