For a healthy democracy to function, there must be public trust in the criminal justice system, of which law enforcement is a key component. In Israel, this trust is low and tanking.
According to surveys by the Israel Democracy Institute, in 2003, 68% of Israeli Jews had faith in the police, and the trust slowly declined; it spiked back up to almost 60% after the police’s heroic efforts in October 2023, but by October 2024 it had plummeted to a mere 39%.
Cover-ups, real or perceived, of extreme police violence leave a very bitter taste in the public consciousness and damage public trust. Even if the average rank-and-file officer does his job honestly, diligently, and selflessly, if the system appears to prevent transparency, the public loses faith in the system.
There are at present two festering cases in which Israeli law enforcement was engaged in extreme violence, and the establishment has adamantly refused to even investigate the officers involved. This must change. Officers deserve some degree of protection, but they do not have absolute immunity. Continuing to stonewall objective inquiries into the conduct of the individual officers and the department’s response will only lead to further erosion of public confidence.
There are certain professions in which the practitioner makes significant and often difficult decisions relating to others and for which society grants them a certain degree of immunity so that they are able to more freely carry out their duties.
This immunity is, of course, limited, and when boundaries are crossed it is important to hold the individual accountable. Both the limited immunity and the accountability are recognized in Jewish and civil law and apply to such professions as physicians, judges, and law enforcement officers.
Jewish law regarding accountability
Regarding judicial errors, the Talmud distinguishes between recognized authorities and ad hoc judges and between errors involving “accepted law” and errors in judgment.
Physicians, like judges, sometimes have time to contemplate options, but at other times they must make split-second decisions. The Jewish laws governing physician culpability are complex.
Some of the considerations are that if a physician erred as the result of “laziness” (hitrashlut) or failure to exercise due diligence (lo iyein yafeh), Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (Shulhan Aruch, 336:2) finds him culpable. So too, in order to benefit from this leeway, the physician must be “accredited” by the local Jewish court (Shulhan Aruch, 336:1), a condition that – as Rabbi Yitzchak Zilberstein is fond of quoting – is fulfilled today by licensing by the relevant government authorities.
Law enforcement officers, whether they be police, soldiers, or others, often must maintain constant and uninterrupted vigilance. A momentary lapse in their concentration or an erroneous decision on their part can have disastrous consequences – for themselves or for others. Their responsibilities are awesome, and as a society we demand from them excellence and grant them authorities given to no one else.
Police officers are allowed to use force in situations where, for civilians, such actions would be deemed assault. They are trained to use “violent methods” in their effort to protect themselves and others.
However, that force must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat they face. For example, in the US, the legal standard for police use of force is often based on what an “objective officer” would do in the same situation, as described in the Graham v. Connor decision (1989).
In Israel, pretty much all segments of the population believe they receive “special” (negative) treatment at the hands of the police and are subjected to unwarranted violence. This is true of Arabs, Ethiopians, haredim, “hilltop” youth, and most recently “Kaplanists.”
All have the perception that at their (and only their) protests, police use excessive and unreasonable force.
In order to maintain some degree of faith and confidence in law enforcement, it is crucial that such claims be investigated and, when officer errors (or worse) are found, that they be dealt with, both to maintain accountability and to improve the system.
Examples of police violence
There have been recent infamous cases in the US. In 2014, Michael Brown was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. A perception of racist-based policing led to widespread looting.
Following a thorough investigation, a grand jury declined to indict Officer Wilson, and the US Department of Justice found that there was insufficient evidence to charge him with civil rights violations. In 2020, George Floyd died while being detained by the police, leading to widespread violent protests. Officer Derek Chauvin was convicted in 2021 of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter.
Israel has also seen examples of lethal and nonlethal but excessive violence by police officers, which generated investigations.
In 2019 Solomon Teka, an Ethiopian Israeli, was shot and killed by an off-duty police officer in Haifa. A thorough investigation was carried out, and the officer was indicted for manslaughter. A full trial took place and in 2024 the officer was acquitted, as the court determined that he legitimately felt threatened.
In 2020 Iyad al-Hallaq, an Arab, was shot and killed by Border Police officers in Jerusalem. A comprehensive inquiry ensued, in 2021 the officer was indicted for manslaughter, but in 2023 the court acquitted him.
These are examples where there was a question of excessive violence, and an investigation was carried out.
In many instance,s when the courts determined there had been nonlethal but excessive violence, rather than an individual officer bearing responsibility, the Israeli Police as an organization pays the penalty. For example, in 2021 police carried out a violent, unjustified strip search on three yeshiva students.
The police department, but not the officers involved, was ordered to compensate the boys with NIS 25,000, while the individual offenders faced no consequences. While these investigations are commendable, the absolving of the wrongdoer is troubling.
The important point in all of those cases, irrespective of the outcome, is that an independent and thorough investigation was carried out.
In contradistinction, there are two recent incidents in which Israeli police acted in a particularly violent manner, serious bodily harm or death resulted, and as far as the public is aware, the establishment has adamantly and consistently refused to even investigate the officers involved and clarify the circumstances.
The first involves the 2020 death of 16-year-old Ahuvia Sandak. Ahuvia and four friends were driving when police spotted them, suspected they had been throwing stones at Arabs, and gave chase at high speed. As part of the chase, the police rear-ended the car of the fleeing teens, which flipped over. Ahuvia was thrown from the vehicle, which landed on top of him, killing him.
There was no serious investigation, no taking of responsibility, and no clarification of the circumstances. Less than a month after the incident, then-attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit ordered the case closed. A young man is dead following an incident involving the police, and the establishment has yet to even investigate what actually happened and whether departmental protocols were violated.
In what can only be described as a mockery, in 2022 the courts ordered the state to compensate the Sandak family for the shockingly paltry sum of NIS 3,000. The family and other concerned citizens are still demanding a transparent, objective investigation. Sadly, it seems that none is forthcoming.
A more recent event is also raising concern and drawing criticism. On January 20, 2025, a police officer opened fire on a group of Jewish youth, shooting about eight bullets. Two people were wounded, one critically. The officer involved was released to house arrest that night.
To this day, seven weeks later, the police have refused to meet with the families or lawyers of the wounded. No eyewitnesses have been interviewed by the Police Investigation Department. It is almost as if the department is not interested in the incident. Israelis were shot and critically wounded by an Israeli police officer and there is no serious investigation. And there is no indication that one is on the horizon.
These two doubly tragic incidents, tragic because of what happened and tragic because of what is not happening, highlight why trust in the Israel Police is now near an all-time low.
Faith in those who are entrusted to make fateful decisions under pressure, whether it be doctors, judges, or police officers, is vital for a functioning society. These professionals have tough jobs, and for there to be a mutually beneficial relationship between them and the public, there needs to be certain limited immunity granted to them, but there must also be accountability when they exceed their authority or act against accepted standards.
A serious change in attitude on the part of the Police Investigation Department is a must or the public will continue to lose faith in the system. These two incidents must be investigated in an unbiased, independent manner, lessons learned, and if there are guilty individuals, they must be held responsible.
The writer is a professor of neuroscience at Bar-Ilan University.