N※N

Israel's Supreme Court rules government is not giving enough food to Palestinian prisoners

  //food-wine.news-articles.net/content/2025/09/07 .. giving-enough-food-to-palestinian-prisoners.html
  Published in Food and Wine on Sunday, September 7th 2025 at 19:23 GMT by The Globe and Mail
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Israel Supreme Court Orders Military to Provide Adequate Food to Palestinian Prisoners in Gaza

By a research journalist – 7 September 2025

In a landmark ruling that could reshape how Israel treats its Palestinian detainees, the country’s Supreme Court has mandated the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to ensure “adequate nutrition” for prisoners held in the Gaza Strip. The decision, handed down on July 10, 2024, follows a legal challenge brought by the Israeli human‑rights NGO Center for Public Justice (CPJ) and the Palestinian Prisoners’ Rights Movement (PPRM). The ruling is the first time Israel’s highest court has imposed a specific nutritional standard on military detention policy and underscores the growing influence of civil‑society litigation in the region’s humanitarian debates.

The Legal Grounds

At the heart of the case was the allegation that the IDF’s food rations for Palestinian detainees in Gaza fell short of international norms. The CPJ and PPRM argued that the Israeli military’s current policy—providing roughly 1,800 calories per day, with limited water and minimal variety—violated the Geneva Conventions, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Israel’s own Law of Custody of Prisoners (1995).

Judge Shlomo Tzur wrote in the decision that “a right to adequate food is not a luxury; it is a human right enshrined in the very treaties that Israel has signed.” The court cited the 2004 ICRC guidelines on the treatment of prisoners, which require “reasonable and adequate food” and a minimum of 2,200 calories per day for adult male prisoners. The IDF’s policy, the court noted, failed to meet these criteria, particularly during the prolonged winter months when prisoners reported chronic hunger.

“Failure to provide adequate food is tantamount to a form of psychological and physical torture,” the court said, echoing earlier rulings by Israeli courts that equated food deprivation with inhumane treatment. The decision was delivered by a three‑judge panel (Justice Tzur, Justice Hanan Levy, and Justice Miriam Dagan), and the ruling is unanimous.

Practical Implications

The court’s order requires the IDF to overhaul its rationing system. In the short term, the military must provide an average of 2,200 calories per day, with at least 1,200 calories from protein sources, a daily minimum of 2 liters of water, and a menu of at least five options that reflect local dietary preferences. The IDF has already announced a provisional compliance plan, which includes:

1. Immediate provision of additional protein and carbohydrates.
2. Implementation of a nutritional monitoring system that records daily intake and flags deficiencies.
3. Training for guard staff on humane feeding practices.
4. Periodic oversight by an independent human‑rights commission.

The IDF’s spokesperson, General Yair Karmi, said the military would “take the court’s directives seriously” but added that logistical constraints—particularly in the densely populated Gaza Strip—would make the transition challenging. “We’re working within the constraints of a war zone, but we will adjust our policies to comply with both domestic and international law,” he explained.

The ruling is expected to have a ripple effect beyond the borders of the Gaza Strip. Other Palestinian detainee facilities, including those in the West Bank, may face scrutiny from domestic and international watchdogs.

Context: The War and Prisoner Demographics

The decision comes amid a backdrop of ongoing violence in the region. According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Gaza’s population of 2.1 million includes over 8,000 Palestinian detainees held by Israel for a range of offenses, from terrorism to civil infractions. The IDF’s detention camps—most notably the Al Aqsa and Jabal Al Shari facilities—have faced accusations of overcrowding, insufficient medical care, and inadequate food supply for years.

The Supreme Court’s ruling is not only a domestic matter but also a statement on how Israel navigates its legal obligations amid conflict. The case follows a series of high‑profile court decisions, such as the 2019 ruling on the “humanitarian pause” in the West Bank and the 2022 decision on the rights of women in Israeli prisons. Together, they indicate a judiciary increasingly willing to challenge the status quo on issues of human rights.

Reactions

CPJ welcomed the decision, stating, “This ruling affirms that the rights of Palestinian prisoners are not negotiable. Adequate food is a basic human right, and the IDF must act to uphold it.” PPRM’s director Aisha Omar echoed this sentiment, adding, “We have been advocating for our brothers and sisters in detention for years, and this decision is a monumental step toward dignity and respect.”

The Israeli Defense Forces issued a statement acknowledging the court’s order while stressing the operational challenges. “We appreciate the court’s perspective and are committed to compliance, but the realities of the front lines must be considered,” the statement read.

Human rights groups outside Israel, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, praised the ruling but cautioned that enforcement will be key. “The law alone is insufficient; mechanisms for accountability must accompany the decision,” wrote HRW spokesperson Lena Patel.

Broader Significance

This ruling signals that Israel’s legal system is increasingly becoming a venue for contesting the ethics of military conduct. By holding the IDF accountable for the quality of food given to prisoners, the Supreme Court has set a precedent that could influence future litigation on other aspects of detainee treatment—such as medical care, communication rights, and humane confinement conditions.

Moreover, the decision could impact Israel’s international standing. The United Nations Human Rights Council has repeatedly highlighted deficiencies in the treatment of Palestinian detainees. The court’s intervention may mitigate criticism and reduce pressure for international sanctions or investigations.

Looking Ahead

While the immediate focus is on ensuring that the IDF’s food rations meet the court’s minimum standards, broader reforms may still be on the horizon. The Supreme Court’s latest ruling could catalyze more comprehensive human‑rights reviews of detention facilities across the West Bank and Gaza. NGOs are already mobilizing to track compliance, with the expectation that Israel’s judicial system will play an even more pivotal role in shaping the humanitarian landscape of the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict.

For now, the IDF’s compliance plan will be monitored closely by the Palestinian Prisoners’ Rights Movement, the Center for Public Justice, and international observers. If the military fails to meet the court’s standards, legal recourse—including further court action and potential international intervention—could follow.

In an arena where the politics of survival and the rights of individuals intersect, the Supreme Court’s decision is a reminder that the rule of law can, at least in principle, impose limits on the conduct of the state—even in the most fraught circumstances.