The Sde Teiman Case (another in the series)

Noam Kozlov has written this post for Just Security on Persecuting the Prosecutors: Israel’s Military Lawyers Under Pressure. Excerpt:

At this point, it is crucial to highlight that safeguarding the Israeli MAG [Military Advocate General] is in the best interest of everyone who values the rule of law, regardless of their broader views on the conflict. Even for those who believe Israel is unwilling or unable to investigate itself, especially with respect to high-ranking officials, the capacity of international tribunals to effectively and timely investigate and prevent violations is, at best, limited. The authority of the MAG within the IDF enables it to influence policy in real-time, not only enforcing but also preventing violations of international law. In this regard, a functioning internal review mechanism cannot be fully replaced by an international body, which has inherently limited resources and access to enforce compliance in real-time. Even when it comes to holding violators accountable, international institutions naturally face limitations in access to information and evidence, and cannot meaningfully replace an effective internal investigative system.

That said, the Israeli MAG seems to be increasingly unable to fulfill its duties in holding violators accountable, partly due to political pressures, including from certain government officials. Therefore, it is essential for Israeli leaders, both in the military and civilian sectors, to safeguard the legitimacy and independence of the MAG; Israel’s allies should also emphasize the critical role the MAG plays in their ongoing cooperation with Israel. Additionally, members of the international law community must voice their support for a robust and independent MAG. As noted above, dismissing the role of the Israeli MAG would be counterproductive; while the MAG faces significant and growing challenges to performing its duties independently and effectively, there is no fully adequate alternative to an internal compliance institution.

Finally, the Sde Teiman case demonstrates that many in the MAG still value the rule of law and the enforcement of international norms, including the officers involved in the investigation and the higher chain of command that authorized and supported them. This is said regardless of whether Yerushalmi should have acted differently with respect to the leak and cover-up. Ultimately, the Sde Teiman soldiers accused of abusing prisoners were indicted with charges of aggravated battery and abuse, and their trial is still ongoing. Therefore, while many changes are needed in the MAG, there is hope, and an urgent need, that the MAG will once again uphold the rule of law and enforce humanitarian duties during war.

Mr. Kozlov concludes: "These dynamics demonstrate the role of the MAG in upholding the rule of law in Israel as part of the broader judicial apparatus. The weakening of the MAG affects not only the IDF’s ability to carry out its missions lawfully, but also the broader protection of the rule of law in Israel." American readers may see some resonance with the current administration's stance with respect to the Judge Advocates General and their responsibilities.