BICOM

Key Points

• The IDF Military Advocate General (MAG) responsible for the investigations into IDF conduct is subject to civilian oversight by the civil Attorney General and the Israeli Supreme Court.
• During Operation Protective Edge the IDF commissioned a Fact Finding Assessment (FFA) Mechanism to investigate major incidents, and 126 cases have been investigated so far.
• An independent Israeli commission (Turkel Commission), in which Lord David Trimble was an observer, recently reviewed Israel’s procedures of self-investigation. Trimble wrote that, “taken as a whole, Israeli law and practice will stand comparison with the best in the world.”

Israeli investigations into Operation Protective Edge

• IDF policy is to examine any complaint or information suggesting faults in its conduct. The IDF has so far referred 126 cases from Operation Protective Edge to investigation. Some 65 cases have been examined and referred to the FFA Mechanism for a decision on whether criminal investigation is warranted. Of these, six cases have been referred for criminal investigation, 17 were closed and others remain under investigation.
• Additionally, 13 criminal investigations have been ordered into allegations that indicated prima faciegrounds for suspecting criminal misconduct without prior examination. Two of the 13 were closed without criminal proceedings. The remainder are ongoing. Incidents currently subject to criminal investigations include:
  • Civilian casualties after a strike in the vicinity of an UNRWA School in Beit Hanoun (24 July 2014).
  • A strike on an UNRWA School in Jabalia on 30 July 2014, which resulted in approximately 20 deaths.
  • An allegation concerning abuse of detainees in Rafah (1 August 2014).
• For more details see IDF updates from September 2014, December 2014 and March 2015.

IDF investigative procedures

• Responsibility for IDF investigations falls to the Military Advocate General Corps, a legal branch within the IDF. The Military Advocate General (MAG), currently Maj. Gen. Danny Efroni, is appointed directly by the Defence Minister and is independent of the IDF command structure. He determines whether a case warrants a full criminal investigation. Efroni recently stressed in a Haaretz interview: “I don’t know how some of our investigations will end, but we will not hesitate. If needs be, we will file indictments.”
• A Fact Finding Assessment (FFA), headed by Maj. Gen. (res.) Yitzhak Eitan is aiding the MAG in reaching decisions on pursuing criminal investigations, and is also tasked to inform the IDF’s future conduct.
• The decisions of the MAG are subject to review by Israel’s civilian Attorney General, an independent, non-political, figure. A complainant or non-governmental organisation may trigger the review of the Attorney General by sending a letter directly to the Attorney General.
• Both the decisions of the MAG and the Attorney General are subject to judicial review by Israel’s Supreme Court, which can be petitioned by Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Israeli standards of self-investigation

• In February 2013 the Turkel Commission (an Israeli public commission to examine the ‘Mavi Marmara’ incident of 31 May 2010) issued its second report, on ‘Israel’s Mechanisms for Examining and Investigating Complaints and Claims of Violations of the Laws of Armed Conflict According to International Law.’
• The commission was chaired by former Israel Supreme Court Justice Jacob Turkel and included Nobel Peace laureate Lord David Trimble as one of two independent observers. Lord Trimble wrote in a letter accompanying the report, that whilst there was room for improvement, “taken as a whole, Israeli law and practice will stand comparison with the best in the world.”
• The report included an extensive survey examining the mechanisms used in Israel in comparison to the United States, Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands.

Download PDF