Skip to main content
From the field

On the Agenda

Filter updates:

12 October 2020

Soldiers again raid Abu Hashhash home, beat two family members and take one to detention on a stretcher

In late August 2020, dozens of Israeli soldiers again raided the home of the extended Abu Hashhash family at night, assaulting several members. They severely beat father of four Iyad Abu Hashhash (45) and carried him away on a stretcher. His relatives later learned he had contracted the coronavirus in an ISA interrogation facility and been quarantined, and then put in administrative detention for four months. Raiding Palestinian homes at night and waking entire families, including young children, is part of the violent occupation routine.

12 October 2020

Israel to High Court: Dying Palestinian Still a Security Risk

For nearly 80 days, Maher al-Akhras (49), a Palestinian father of six from the Jenin area, has been on hunger strike to protest an administrative detention order issued against him from early Aug. through 26 Nov. 2020. Although he is on the brink of death, the High Court is avoiding a decision and again cooperating with Israel’s appalling refusal to release him, as in previous cases. The responsibility for what happens next lies with all those who could have prevented al-Akhras’ deterioration and can still prevent his death.
9 February 2020

Occupation routine, December 2019: Four teenagers held for months without trial

Since 2015, hardly a month has gone by without Israel holding Palestinian minors in administrative detention; four were being held at the end of 2019. The military justice system regularly violates the rights of detained minors, who face it alone with no explanation of their rights or what lies ahead, while Israel makes a show of protecting their rights. Administrative detention makes this worse as the date of release is unknown. B’Tselem spoke with three minors, two of whom are still in detention and the third was released in early January 2020.

10 October 2019

Sentencing as a recommendation only: On day of release, Israel transfers Palestinian prisoners to administrative detention

Israel uses two kinds of proceedings to imprison Palestinian residents of the West Bank: criminal and administrative. Actually fairly similar, as no genuine legal proceeding is undertaken in either case, the one major difference is that criminal proceedings culminate in a finite prison sentence, whereas administrative detention can be extended indefinitely. In five cases from the past two years, B’Tselem found that the military eliminated even this difference, imposing administrative detention on prisoners on the last day of their court-mandated sentence.

30 July 2018

With no cause or end in sight: Administrative detention a routine matter

Hundreds of Palestinians are held in Israeli prisons, in Israel and in the West Bank, without charges, without being seeing the alleged evidence against them and without knowing when they will be released. Israel calls this routine practice “administrative detention” and has held hundreds of Palestinians this way at any given moment over decades. Administrative detention powers are extreme and sweeping, and while the detentions are ostensibly subject to judicial review, they are routinely upheld by the military courts and the Supreme Court.

6 October 2016

Administrative detainees forced to risk lives for freedom

Israel recently agreed to stop renewing the administrative detention of three Palestinians who went on hunger strike to protest being held without trial or time limit. Risking their lives is the only way for such detainees to go free, to challenge the injustice, and to prevent repeated renewal of their detention, given that judicial review is a mere formality. The fact that Israel insists in holding them even on the verge of death belies that argument that they are being held to prevent a threat to public security. This practice must stop.

7 August 2016

14½ years in prison? Make that 15 …. and counting

On 13 June 2016 Bilal Kayed finished serving a 14½-year prison sentence. His waiting family was then told that he was not being released, and was being placed in administrative detention for six months. Administrative detention is based on classified “evidence” that is not revealed to the detainee, so he cannot refute it, and has no maximum time limit. While Israel has long and widely used this draconian measure, imposing administrative detention immediately after a long prison sentence is exceptionally harsh. Yet the military judges - who are an integral part of the mechanisms of occupation - approved it even in this case.

28 July 2016

Israel once again holding minors without trial

In October 2015, Israel resumed its use of administrative detention against Palestinian minors, for the first time since December 2011. At the end of April 2016, the IPS was holding 13 – the highest number since August 2008. Administrative detainees are held for indefinite periods of time, without knowing the charges against them and without standing trial. The increase in the number of Palestinians held this way, and the renewed inclusion of minors, is an even greater abuse of this draconian measure than before.

3 March 2016

Trends in 2015 inmate figures: Record number of Palestinians held in Israel

According to Israel Prison Service figures, the last quarter of 2015 saw a marked rise in the number of Palestinians in Israeli custody, including administrative detainees, women and minors: at the end of 2015, 6,066 Palestinians were being held on security grounds, the highest number since July 2010. This includes 584 administrative detainees - the most since September 2008; 422 minors - the most since August 2008 at the latest, and 44 women - the most since September 2009.

18 February 2016

B'Tselem Executive Director in Letter to Prime Minister: Order the Immediate Release of Hunger Striker Muhammad al-Qiq

In a letter sent today to the Prime Minister, Hagai Elad criticizes the HCJ ruling rejecting al-Qiq’s request to transfer to a Ramallah hospital. The HCJ justices argued that if the security establishment sought to detain al-Qiq again in the future, this would endanger soldiers’ lives. Elad notes that “This position reflects a new low in the instrumentalist approach to human beings.” The fact that the Court accepted this argument says more about the justices than about its reasonableness.