US Senate Report: CIA used Israeli courts as precedent to justify torture

Despite the citation of Israeli precedent, CIA torture techniques allegedly went far beyond the "moderate physical pressure" standard permitted by the Israeli courts.

December 10, 2014 16:53
1 minute read.

Demonstrator reenacts waterboarding in Washington anti-torture protest, 2007. (photo credit: REUTERS)


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief


Tuesday’s landmark US Senate Report on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on detainees said the CIA had cited Israeli courts as a precedent for justifying the torture program.

On November 26, 2001, soon after the September 11 attacks on the US, the CIA general counsel wrote that “the Israeli example” could serve as “a possible basis for arguing... regarding terrorist detainees that ‘torture was necessary to prevent imminent, significant, physical harm to persons, where there is no other available means to prevent the harm.’” The internal memorandum also said that “states may be very unwilling to call the US to task for torture when it resulted in saving thousands of lives.”

An August 1, 2002, memorandum by the same office to White House counsel includes a similar review of this argument – known as a necessity defense – against potential charges of torture.

In 2005, there was a congressional and nationwide debate over the detainee interrogation program, with many moving to limit the program’s breadth but also formally legalize aspects of it via legislation.

CIA lawyers working in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Office of the General Counsel in 2005 and 2007 referred to the public debate as strikingly similar to the debate Israel had regarding the 1999 High Court of Justice ruling on torture.

More specifically, the lawyer said the Israeli court had authorized some techniques, provided there was first legislative action to allow them – something the government eventually obtained.

The lawyer noted that the use of enhanced interrogation was limited to “ticking bomb” scenarios – those in which there is an immediate security threat.

Further, a court would not able to authorize these techniques in advance, only retroactively approve them in the event that an interrogator facing charges of torture cited a necessity defense.

Despite the citation of Israeli precedent, a major accusation against the CIA’s enhanced interrogation program is that the torture techniques went far beyond the “moderate physical pressure” standard permitted by the Israeli courts, and that the program had used torture even in cases when there was no “ticking bomb” or imminent danger.

Join Jerusalem Post Premium Plus now for just $5 and upgrade your experience with an ads-free website and exclusive content. Click here>>

Related Content

An orthodox Jew takes pictures of tourists at the Western Wall
January 16, 2019
IN PICTURES: Israel transformed into magical winter land