We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2011
Goldstone's recent retraction can leave the reader of the report that bears his name somewhat perplexed. Indeed, if the deliberate intent to target civilians could be discussed in some specific attacks listed, such a report nevertheless describes a pattern of behaviour that cannot be swept aside without disregarding the order of priorities set by the Israeli legal system itself. Through analysis of the new Israeli military code of ethics as well as the Israeli Supreme Court case law, this paper examines how civilians in Gaza were deliberately put at risk by a specific interpretation breaking down the flat rule of civilian immunity into a more complex construction opposing the Israeli soldiers’ right to life to the rights of an ‘enemy population’.
1 R. Goldstone, ‘Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and War Crimes’, Washington Post, 1 April 2011, available online at www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reconsidering-the-goldstone-report-on-israel-and-war-crimes/2011/04/01/AFg111JC_story.html.
2 See Human Rights Council, Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories, Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, Doc. A/HRC/12/48, 15 September 2009, para. 1680 (hereafter, Goldstone Report).
3 See Human Rights Council, Report of the Committee of Independent Experts in International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law Established Pursuant to Council Resolution 13/9, Doc. A/HRC/16/24, 18 March 2011.
4 See J. Dugard, ‘Where Now for the Goldstone Report?’, 6 April 2011, available online at www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/04/goldstone-report-israel-rights.
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Art. 30(2)(b).
6 See, e.g., A. Pfeffer, ‘IDF Officer: Gaza Civilians Risked to Protect Israel Troops during War’, Haaretz, 3 February 2010, available online at www.haaretz.com/news/idf-officer-gaza-civilians-risked-to-protect-israel-troops-during-war-1.262686.
7 Y. Levy, ‘Why Did the Killing Increase?’ (in Hebrew), Haaretz, 18 January 2009, available online at http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/spages/1056373.html.
8 PCHR, ‘Confirmed Figures Reveal the True Extent of the Destruction Inflicted upon the Gaza Strip’, press release, 12 March 2009, available online at www.pchrgaza.org/portal/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1073:confirmed-figures-reveal-the-true-extent-of-the-destruction-inflicted-upon-the-gaza-strip-israels-offensive-resulted-in-1417-dead-including-926-civilians-255-police-officers-and-236-fighters&catid=36:pchrpressreleases&Itemid=194; Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, ‘Cast Lead Offensive in Numbers’, at 7, available online at www.mezan.org/upload/8941.pdf.
9 IDF spokesperson, ‘Majority of Palestinians Killed in Operation Cast Lead: Terror Operatives’, 26 March 2009, available online at http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/09/03/2602.htm.
10 ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, [1996] ICJ Rep. (I), 226, 257.
11 Kasher, A. and Yadlin, A., ‘Assassination and Preventive Killing’, 25 SAIS Review, Winter–Spring 2005, 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
12 See A. Harel, ‘The Philosopher Who Gave the IDF Moral Justification in Gaza’, Haaretz, 6 February 2009, available online at www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1062127.html.
13 Quoted by A. Feldman, ‘The Law under Fire’, The Lawyer, June 2002, 12.
14 See HCJ, 428/86, Barzilai v. Israel, 40(3) P.D. 505, 1986.
15 See, HCJ, Manning v. Attorney-General, HCJ 7052/03, 14 May 2006, Opinion of Vice-President Emeritus M. Cheshin, para. 110.
16 See Kasher, A. and Yadlin, A., ‘Military Ethics of Fighting Terror: An Israeli Perspective’, (2005) 4 Journal of Military Ethics 8Google Scholar.
17 A. Kasher, ‘Operation Cast Lead and Just War Theory’, Azure, Summer 2009, 55. See also Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 8. A. Kasher, ‘A Moral Evaluation of the Gaza War: Operation Cast Lead’, 9 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 4 February 2010, available online at www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=378&PID=0&IID=3345&TTL=A_Moral_Evaluation_of_the_Gaza_War_%E2%80%93_Operation_Cast_Lead.
18 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 8.
19 Ibid., at 20.
20 Ibid., at 17. Kasher, ‘Operation Cast Lead and Just War Theory’, supra note 17, at 66; Kasher, ‘A Moral Evaluation of the Gaza War’, supra note 17. See also Yadlin, A., ‘Ethical Dilemmas in Fighting Terrorism’, (2004) 4 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs BriefGoogle Scholar, available online at www.jcpa.org/brief/brief004-8.htm.
21 Kasher, A., ‘The Principle of Distinction’, (2007) 6 Journal of Military Ethics 152CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 163. See also Statman, D., ‘Targeted Killing’, (2004) 5 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 179CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 189–90. Cf. Bomann-Larsen, L., ‘Licence to Kill? The Question of Just vs. Unjust Combatants’, (2004) 3 Journal of Military Ethics 142CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 143–5.
22 Benvenisti, E., ‘Human Dignity in Combat: The Duty to Spare Enemy Civilians’, (2006), 39 Israel Law Review 83CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Solomon, S., ‘Targeted Killings and the Soldiers' Right to Life’, (2007) 14 ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law 108Google Scholar.
24 See, on this point, Frantzen, H. A., ‘“Incident at a Roadblock”: Get Used to It!’, (2003) 2 Journal of Military Ethics 78CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 78–81; J. Bethke Elshtain, Just War against Trror (2004), 67–9; M. Walzer, Arguing about War (2004), 136–7.
25 Solomon, supra note 22, at 111–14; Benvenisti, supra note 22, at 89–90, 93. See also, concerning the link between the state and its citizens, HCJ, Physicians for Human Rights v. The Commander of IDF Forces in the Gaza Strip [the Rafah case], HCJ 4764/04, 30 May 2004, para. 33: ‘Israel has a duty to protect its citizens. It does not forfeit this duty because some citizens are “prepared to take the risk.” The state remains responsible for the safety of its citizens, and it must do its utmost to return them safely to Israel.’
26 See Margalit, A. and Walzer, M., ‘Israel: Civilians and Combatants’, 56 New York Review of Books, 14 May 2009Google Scholar.
27 Ibid.
28 Lee, S., ‘Double Effect, Double Intention, and Asymmetric Warfare’, (2004) 3 Journal of Military Ethics 247CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Sloane, R. D., ‘The Cost of Conflation: Preserving the Dualism of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello in the Contemporary Law of War’, (2009) 34 YJIL 47Google Scholar, at 75ff.
29 A. Kasher, Military Ethics (1996), 57–8. See also Solomon, supra note 22, at 106.
31 Kasher, ‘Operation Cast Lead and Just War Theory’, supra note 17, at 65.
32 Ibid., at 65–6.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid.
35 Ibid.
36 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 11, at 49.
37 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 17.
38 Kasher, supra note 21, at 159–60.
39 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 11, at 53.
41 See on this point the criticisms raised by Haydar, B., ‘The Ethics of Fighting Terror and the Priority of Citizens’, (2005) 4 Journal of Military Ethics 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
43 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 18.
44 Kasher, ‘Operation Cast Lead and Just War Theory’, supra note 17, at 69.
45 Ibid., at 66.
46 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, 1977, Art. 57.
47 Ibid., Art. 58.
48 See HCJ, Physicians for Human Rights and Others v. Prime Minister of Israel and Others, HCJ 248/09, 19 January 2009, para. 27.
49 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘The Operation in Gaza, Factual and Legal Aspects’, July 2009, 56. See also 140–1.
50 Fletcher, G. P., ‘Collective Guilt and Collective Punishment’, (2004) 5 Theoretical Enquiries in Law 163Google Scholar, at 165–6.
51 See on this point Fischer, D. H., ‘Human Shields, Homicides, and House Fires: How a Domestic Law Analogy Can Guide International Law Regarding Human Shields Tactics in Armed Conflict’, (2007) 57 AULR 489Google Scholar.
52 Lee, supra note 28, at 249.
53 Haydar, supra note 41, at 57.
54 Rogers, A. P., ‘Zero-Casualty Warfare’, (2000) 837 IRRC 179Google Scholar; Shamash, H. E., ‘How Much Is Too Much? An Examination of the Principle of Jus in Bello Proportionality’, (2005–06) 2 I.D.F. Law Review 124Google Scholar.
55 Art. 57(2)(c) of Additional Protocol I. According to the ICRC, Article 57(1) codifies the principle of precautions in attack and Art. 57(2)(c) is a rule of customary international law applicable to international and non-international armed conflict. See J.-M. Henckaerts and L. Doswald-Beck, Customary International Humanitarian Law: Rules (2005), 51, 62. For a description of the warnings provided by the IDF in relation to attacks during Operation Cast Lead, see Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 49, at 99–100; Goldstone Report, supra note 2, paras. 498ff.
56 Kasher, ‘A Moral Evaluation of the Gaza War’, supra note 17.
57 International Committee of the Red Cross, ‘Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International humanitarian Law’, May 2009, at 40, available online at www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/review-872-p991.
58 See J. Dugard, ‘No Safe Place’, report of the Independent Fact Finding Committee on Gaza presented to the League of Arab States, 30 April 2009, §298.
60 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 513.
61 Ibid., para. 520.
62 See Dugard, supra note 58, para. 288.
63 Kasher, ‘A Moral Evaluation of the Gaza War’, supra note 17.
65 HCJ, Iyyad v. State of Israel, CrimA 6659/06, 11 June 2008, para. 11.
66 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, paras. 273–281.
67 On this point, see, e.g., UN Human Rights Council, UN Human Rights Council: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967, A/HRC/4/17, 29 January 2007, at 6, available online at www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/461e52b12.html; SC Res. 1860 (2009) and Human Rights Council Res. S-9/1; Human Rights Watch, ‘Israel: Threatened Sanctions on Gaza Violate Laws of War’, 20 September 2007, available online at www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/09/19/israel-threatened-sanctions-gaza-violate-laws-war; B'Tselem, ‘The Scope of Israeli Control in the Gaza Strip’, available online at www.btselem.org/english/Gaza_Strip/Gaza_Status.asp. See also Zemach, A., ‘Taking War Seriously: Applying the Law of War to Hostilities within an Occupied Territory’, (2006) 38 George Washington International Law Review 645Google Scholar, at 662ff.; James, C., ‘Mere Words: The “Enemy Entity” Designation of the Gaza Strip’, (2009) 32 Hast. ICLR 643Google Scholar, at 643ff.; Scobbie, I., ‘An Intimate Disengagement: Israel's Withdrawal from Gaza, the Law of Occupation and of Self-Determination’, (2004) 11 Yearbook of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law 3Google Scholar, at 20ff.; Bisharat, G. E. et al. , ‘Israel's Invasion of Gaza in International Law’, 36 Denver JILP 41Google Scholar, at 47ff.
68 See Channel 10 News, ‘I'm Not Ashamed’, 23 January 2009, available online at http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=611758&sid=126&typeid=1&pid=48, quoted by the Public Committee against Torture in Israel, ‘No Second Thoughts: The Changes in the Israeli Defense Forces’ Combat Doctrine in Light of “Operation Cast Lead”’, Special Report, November 2009, 14, available online at www.stoptorture.org.il.
69 Breaking the Silence, Soldiers’ Testimonies from Operation Cast Lead, Gaza 2009, Testimony 8, at 21, available online at www.breakingthesilence.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Operation_Cast_Lead_Gaza_2009_Eng.pdf. This peculiar testimony is confirmed by many others. See Testimony 7, at 20; Testimony 9, at 24; Testimony 10, at 27; Testimony 11, at 30; Testimony 12, at 33–4; Testimony 20, at 48; Testimony 21, at 50–1; Testimony 22, at 53; Testimony 24, at 56; Testimony 25, at 60; Testimony 27, at 64; Testimony 31, at 72; Testimony 34, at 77; Testimony 40, at 89; Testimony 41, at 90; Testimony 43, at 92; Testimony 50, at 104–5.
70 Quoted in the Public Committee against Torture in Israel, supra note 68, at 19.
71 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, paras. 702–881.
72 See The death of Muhammad Hajji in the attack on his family's house and The shooting of Shahd Hajji and Ola Masood Arafat, ibid., para. 747; The shooting of Ibrahim Juha, ibid., para. 761; The killing of Majda and Rayya Hajaj, ibid., paras. 764, 767; The shooting of Amal, Souad, Samar and Hajja Souad Abd Rabbo, ibid., para. 770; The shooting of Rouhiyah al-Najjar, ibid., para. 781.
73 See The shooting of Amal, Souad, Samar and Hajja Souad Abd Rabbo, ibid., para. 776.
74 See The Abu Halima family case, ibid., para. 798.
75 See The killing of Ateya al-Samouni and his son Ahmad, ibid., para. 707.
76 See The shooting of Iyad al-Samouni, ibid., para. 736.
77 See The death of Muhammad Hajji in the attack on his family's house and The shooting of Shahd Hajji and Ola Masood Arafat, ibid., para. 748; The shooting of Ibrahim Juha, ibid., para. 758; The killing of Majda and Rayya Hajaj, ibid., paras. 764, 767; The shooting of Amal, Souad, Samar and Hajja Souad Abd Rabbo, ibid., paras. 771, 776; The shooting of Rouhiyah al-Najjar, ibid., para. 781.
78 See The killing of Majda and Rayya Hajaj, ibid., paras. 764, 767.
79 See The attack on the house of Wa'el al-Samouni, ibid., paras. 723, 727.
80 See The death of Muhammad Hajji in the attack on his family's house and The shooting of Shahd Hajji and Ola Masood Arafat, ibid., para. 752; The shooting of Ibrahim Juha, ibid., para. 761.
81 Ibid., para. 802.
82 Ibid., para. 801.
83 Ibid., para. 805.
84 On this point, see M. Shaw, ‘Risk-Transfer Militarism and the Legitimacy of War after Iraq’, available online at www.theglobalsite.ac.uk/press/402shaw.htm.
85 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, paras. 711–713.
86 Goldstone, supra note 1.
87 See Haaretz, 24 October 2010, ‘What Led to IDF Bombing of a House Full of Civilians during the Gaza War?’, available online at www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/what-led-to-idf-bombing-house-full-ofcivilians-during-gaza-war-1.320816, quoted in Human Rights Council, supra note 3, footnote 21.
88 See ibid., para. 27. See also the Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 727.
89 Crawford, J. and Olleson, S., ‘The Nature and Forms of International Responsibility’, in Evans, M. (ed.), International Law (2003), 445Google Scholar.
90 Lee, supra note 28, at 244.
91 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 528.
92 Art. 43 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, 1977: ‘The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party.’
93 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘The Operation in Gaza: Factual and Legal Aspects’, July 2009, paras. 28, 75, 78–79, available online at www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/E89E699D-A435-491B-B2D0-017675DAFEF7/0/GazaOperation.pdf.
94 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, paras. 34, 308, 413, 429, 434, 493.
95 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 93, para. 237.
96 Ibid., paras. 36, 237.
97 Kasher, supra note 21, at 152.
98 HCJ, Public Committee against Torture in Israel v. Government of Israel, HCJ 769/02, 14 December 2006, para. 25.
99 See the terminology used in Art. 4(2) of the Third Geneva Convention.
100 This logic is not new and can be traced back to a 1969 judgment of an Israeli Military Court; see Military Prosecutor v. Kassem and Others, (1970) 42 Israel Law Review 470. See also Dinstein, Y., ‘Unlawful Combatancy’, (2002) 32 IYHR 258Google Scholar.
101 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 22.
102 Additional Protocol I, Art. 51(2).
103 HCJ, supra note 98, para. 24.
104 HCJ, Arad v. Knesset, 2967/00, 191; see also State of Israel v. Barghouti, SFC 1158/02 (TA), para. 35.
105 In this regard, it seems important to recall that the Goldstone Mission has not been able to obtain any direct evidence related to the specific intent of shielding the combatants from counter-attack on this question. See Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 450. Amnesty International, for its part, did not find evidence that Hamas or other Palestinian groups violated the laws of war to the extent repeatedly alleged by Israel. In particular, it found no evidence that Hamas or other fighters directed the movement of civilians to shield military objectives from attack. Amnesty International, Israel/Gaza, Operation Cast Lead: 22 Days of Death and Destruction (July 2009), 76–7. Likewise, in the 53 civilian deaths in Gaza investigated by Human Rights Watch, Palestinian fighters were not in the area at the time of the attack. See Human Rights Watch, Turning a Blind Eye, Impunity for Laws-of-War Violations during the Gaza War (April 2010), 9. The Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights also acknowledges that either there was no large-scale abuse of civilians and civilian objects by combatants or that civilian deaths could not be explained as resulting from the presence of fighters in civilian areas. See Human Rights Council, The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Particularly Due to the Recent Israeli Military Attacks against the Occupied Gaza Strip, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the implementation of the Human Rights Council Res. S-9/1, Doc. A/HRC/12/37, 13 August 2009, para. 24.
106 Art. 1 of the Regulations appended to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907: ‘The laws, rights and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps fulfilling the following conditions: To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance; To carry arms openly; and To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.’ This wording is repeated in Art. 13 of the First and Second Geneva Conventions, and Art. 4 of the Third Geneva Convention.
107 See, on this point, Mandernach, C. J., ‘Warriors without Law: Embracing a Spectrum of Status for Military Actors’, (2007) 7 Appalachian Journal of Law 162Google Scholar.
108 Additional Protocol I, Arts. 43(1), 43(2).
109 Ibid, Art. 44(3).
110 Ibid., Art. 44(2).
111 Ibid., Arts. 44(3)(a), 44(3)(b).
112 Gross, E., ‘Thwarting Terrorist Acts by Attacking the Perpetrators or Their Commanders as an Act of Self-Defense: Human Rights versus the State's Right to Protect Its Citizens’, (2001) 15 Temple ICLJ 195Google Scholar, at 203–5; Ben-Naftali, O. and Michaeli, K. R., ‘We Must Not Make a Scarecrow of the Law: A Legal Analysis of the Israeli Policy of Targeted Killings’, (2003) 36 CILJ 233Google Scholar, at 266ff.
113 See HCJ, supra note 98, para. 27.
114 Ibid.
115 See O. Ben-Naftali and K. Michaeli, ‘Public Committee against Torture in Israel v. Government of Israel, Case n°HCJ 769/02’, 101 (2007) AJIL 459, at 464–5.
116 Ibid.
117 HCJ, supra note 98, para. 27.
118 See Even-Khen, H. Moodrick, ‘Can We Now Tell What “Direct Participation in Hostilities” Is?’, (2007) 40 Israel Law Review 213CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 228ff. In the same perspective, in State of Israel v. Marwan Barghouti, the Court ruled that ‘terrorists who attack civilians are not “lawful combatants” entitled to POW status in light of their unlawful activities . . . unlawful combatants who attack civilians are not entitled to this status’, Cr.C. (T.A.) 092134/02, State of Israel v. Marwan Barghouti, 2002, available online at www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/12/State%20of%C20Israel%C20vs%C20Marwan%Barghouti-%20.
120 HCJ, supra note 98, para. 31.
121 Ibid., para. 26.
122 Ibid., para. 31.
123 Y. Sandoz, C. Seimarski, and B. Simmerman, Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 1977 to the Geneva Convention of 1949 (1987), para. 618. See also Jinks, D., ‘The Declining Significance of POW Status’, (2004) 45 Harv. ILJ 367Google Scholar, at 410.
124 See Kretzmer, D., ‘Targeted Killing of Suspected Terrorists: Extra-Judicial Executions or Legitimate Means of Defence?’, (2005) 16 EJIL 194CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Sassòli, M., ‘Use and Abuse of the Laws of War in the “War on Terrorism”’, (2004) 22 Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice 195Google Scholar, at 207–8.
125 See Sandoz, Seimarski, and Simmerman, supra note 123, paras. 1679, 1945. See also ICTY, Prosecutor v. Strugar, Case No. IT-01-42-A, Judgement of 17 July 2008, paras. 175–176.
127 Sandoz, Seimarski, and Simmerman, supra note 123, para. 1453.
128 See Ben-Naftali and Michaeli, supra note 112, at 269.
129 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 47.
130 See Sandoz, Seimarski, and Simmerman, supra note 123, para. 1679.
132 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 51–2.
133 Report DPH 2004, at 10; Report DPH 2005, at 35ff. For dissenting views, see Report DPH 2006, at 26, 65; Report DPH 2008, at 51, 53ff.
134 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 53.
135 Ibid., at 58.
136 See ICTY, Prosecutor v. Kunarac et al., Case No. IT-96–23, Judgement of 12 June 2002 (Appeals Chamber), para. 58; ICTR, Prosecutor v. Rutaganda, Case No. ICTR-96–3, Judgement of 26 May 2003 (Appeals Chamber), para. 570.
137 HCJ, supra note 98, para. 35.
138 Ibid.
140 Ibid., para. 37.
141 Ibid.
142 A. Cassese, Expert Opinion on Whether Israel's Targeted Killings of Palestinian Terrorists Is Consonant with International Humanitarian Law, HCJ 5100/94, Pub. Comm. against Torture in Israel v. Israel (Israel 1999), paras. 12–15; Eichensehr, K. E., ‘On Target? The Israeli Supreme Court and the Expansion of Targeted Killings’, (2007) 116 Yale Law Journal 1876CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
143 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 53.
144 Kasher, ‘A Moral Evaluation of the Gaza War’, supra note 17.
147 Report DPH 2005, at 28.
148 Background Doc. DPH 2004, at 27; Report DPH 2005, at 28, 34.
149 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 52. See also Background Doc. DPH 2004, at 27ff.; Report DPH 2004, at 11, 25; Report DPH 2005, at 28, 34.
150 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 15.
151 The Public Committee against Torture in Israel, supra note 68, at 10.
152 Ibid.
153 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 23.
154 Ibid., at 24. See also Shani, Y., ‘Israel Counter-Terrorism Measures: Are They Kosher under International Law?’, in Schmitt, M. N. (ed.), Terrorism and International Law: Challenges and Responses (2003), 104Google Scholar.
155 Blumenson, E., ‘Killing in Good Conscience: What's Wrong with Sunstein and Vermeule's Lesser Evil Argument for Capital Punishment and Other Human Rights Violations?’, (2007) 10 New Criminal Law Review 229Google Scholar.
156 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 11, at 53.
157 See, on this point, Finkelstein, C. O., ‘Duress: A Philosophical Account of the Defense in Law’, (1995) 37 Arizona Law Review 259Google Scholar.
158 Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck, supra note 55, para. 38.
159 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 65.
160 See Gaggioli, G. and Kolb, R., ‘A Right to Life in Armed Conflicts? The Contribution of the European Court of Human Rights’, 37 Isr. YHR 115Google Scholar, at 146ff.; Dinstein, Y., ‘Distinction and Loss of Civilian Protection in International Armed Conflicts’, 38 IYHR 10Google Scholar.
161 Kretzmer, supra note 124, at 171, 190–1. See also Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 11, at 48–9; Rosen, R. D., ‘Targeting Enemy Forces in the War on Terror: Preserving Civilian Immunity’, (2009) 42 Vand. JTL 683Google Scholar, at 737–9; Watkin, K., ‘Controlling the Use of Force: A Role For Human Rights Norms in Contemporary Armed Conflict?’, (2004) 98 AJIL 17CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Parks, W. Hays, ‘Air War and the Law of War’, (1990) 31 AFLR 1Google Scholar, at 118–20. Schmitt, M. N., ‘Direct Participation in Hostilities and 21st Century Armed Conflict’, in Fischerr, H. (ed.), Crisis Management and Humanitarian Protection: Festshrift fur Dieter Fleck (2004), 536Google Scholar; Y. Dinstein, The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict (2004), 29; Shani, supra note 154, at 104. See also Supplemental Response on Behalf of the State Attorney's Office, Pub. Comm. against Torture in Israel v. Israel, HCJ 769/02, at 9–10.
162 HCJ, supra note 98, para. 39.
163 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 21.
164 Fenrick, W. J., ‘The Targeted Killings Judgement and the Scope of Direct Participation in Hostilities’, (2007) 5 JICJ 332Google Scholar, at 336–7.
167 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 14.
168 Eichensehr, supra note 142, at 1876.
169 Ibid., para. 391.
170 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 93, para. 237.
171 Ibid., para. 241.
172 Ibid., para. 242.
173 Ibid., paras. 244–245. See also Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, ‘Hamas and the Terrorist Threat from the Gaza Strip: The Main Findings of the Goldstone Report versus the Factual Findings’, March 2010, available online at www.terrorism-info.org.il/site/content/t1.asp?Sid=13&Pid=334.
174 Halevi, J. D., ‘Palestinian “Policemen” Killed in Gaza Operation Were Trained Terrorists’, 9 Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 13 September 2009Google Scholar, available online at www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=1&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=442&PID=0&IID=3081&TTL=Palestinian_’Policemen’_Killed_in_Gaza_Operation_Were_Trained_Terrorists. See also Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 93, paras. 247–248.
175 Ibid., at 33.
176 International Committee of the Red Cross, supra note 57, at 70.
177 Ibid., at 34.
178 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 417.
179 Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, supra note 93, para. 247. See also para. 241.
180 Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 415.
181 Ibid. The reports are even precise that ‘At the other police stations, the police were engaged in a range of routine tasks, including questioning detainees and handling issues for members of the public who were present in police facilities in the middle of an ordinary day’; see ibid., para. 427.
182 See the definition given by the Israeli Supreme Court, HCJ, supra note 98, para. 39.
183 Ibid., paras. 63, 1206.
184 Ibid.
185 Ynet, ‘Deputy Chief of Staff: Worst Still Ahead’, quoted in the Goldstone Report, supra note 2, para. 1208.
186 Ibid., para. 1207.
187 HCJ, Adalah Legal Centre for Arab Minority Rights in Israel and others v. Minister of Interior, HCJ 7052/03, 14 May 2006, paras. 9, 110.
188 Ibid.
189 Ibid., para. 12.
191 Kasher and Yadlin, supra note 16, at 7.
192 Ibid., at 65.
193 Ibid.
194 See J. Halper, ‘The Second Battle of Gaza: Israel's Undermining of International Law’, Monthly Review, available online at http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/halper260210.html.
195 See HCJ, supra note 98, paras. 2, 3.
196 See, on this point, Fellmeth, A. X., ‘Questioning Civilian Immunity’, (2008) 43 Texas ILJ 453Google Scholar, at 462. See also Margalit and Walzer, supra note 26.
