The creation of the State of Israel in 1948 was preceded by more than 50 years of efforts to establish a sovereign nation as a homeland for Jews. The desire of Jews to return to what they consider their rightful homeland was first expressed during the Babylonian exile and became a universal Jewish theme after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D. The settling of scattered colonies of Jews outside Palestine became known as the diaspora. In the 1880s, European Jews immigrated to Palestine to escape the pogrom, the massacre of Jews in Russia and Poland. The efforts to establish a Jewish state in Palestine were initiated by Theodore Herzl, founder of the Zionist movement in 1896. The Zionist movement was given added impetus by the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which asserted the British Government's support for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine.

In the years following World War I, Palestine became a British Mandate and Jewish immigration steadily increased. Between World War I and World War II, over 230,000 Jews arrived in the area of Palestine from Russia, Poland, and Germany, providing skills and infrastructure for a future Jewish states, but also fueling violence between Palestine's Jewish community and Arab community who feared displacement. Mounting British efforts to restrict this immigration were countered by international support for Jewish national aspirations following the near-extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis during the World War II Holocaust. This support led to the 1947 UN partition plan, which would have divided Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem under UN administration. On May 14, 1948, soon after the British quit Palestine, the State of Israel was proclaimed by Jewish authorities and was immediately invaded by armies from neighboring Arab states, which rejected the UN partition plan. This conflict, Israel's War of Independence, was concluded by armistice agreements between Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria in 1949 and resulted in a 50% increase in Israeli territory. In 1956, French, British, and Israeli forces engaged Egypt in response to its nationalization of the Suez Canal (and exclusion of its use by Israel) and blockade of the Straits of Tiran (Israel's Red Sea access). Israeli forces withdrew in March 1957, after the United Nations established the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) in the Gaza Strip and Sinai. Egypt reopened the canal and permitted Israel access to the Straits of Tiran. This war resulted in no territorial shifts and was followed by several years of terrorist incidents and retaliatory acts across Israel's borders. In 1964, the Arab League developed the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as a vehicle for expressing Palestinian nationalism and focusing Arab military efforts. In June 1967, Israeli forces struck targets in Egypt, Jordan, and Syria in response to Egyptian President Nasser's ordered withdrawal of UN peacekeepers from the Sinai Peninsula, the buildup of Arab armies along Israel's borders, and (once again) the exclusion of Israeli shipping from the Strait of Tiran. All parties agreed to a cease-fire after the "six-day war," under which Israel retained control of the Sinai Peninsula, the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip, the formerly Jordanian-controlled West Bank of the Jordan River, and East Jerusalem. These areas came to be known as the "Occupied Territories," to be subsequently placed under military administration by Israel. On November 22, 1967, the Security Council adopted Resolution 242, the "land for peace" formula, which called for the establishment of a just and lasting peace based on Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 in return for the end of all states of belligerency, respect for the sovereignty of all states in the area, and the right to live in peace within secure, recognized boundaries. The issue of withdrawal versus annexation of the Occupied Territories has since then been a pivot issue in Israeli politics, leading in 1973 to the formation of Likud, a party devoted to annexation, in opposition to the more moderate peace-oriented position of then Prime Minister Golda Meir's Labor Party.

The following years were marked by continuing violence across the Suez Canal, punctuated by the 1969-70 war of attrition. On October 6, 1973--Yom Kippur (the Jewish Day of Atonement), the armies of Syria and Egypt launched an attack against Israel. The Arab-Israeli War of 1973 became known as the Yom Kippur War by the Israelis and the Ramadan War by Arabs. Although the Egyptians and Syrians initially made significant advances, Israel was able to push the invading armies back beyond the 1967 cease-fire lines by the time the United States and the Soviet Union helped bring an end to the fighting. In the UN Security Council, the United States supported Resolution 338, which reaffirmed Resolution 242 as the framework for peace and called for peace negotiations between the parties. In the years that followed, sporadic clashes continued along the cease-fire lines but, guided by the U.S., Egypt and Israel continued negotiations. In November 1977, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat made an historic visit to Jerusalem, which opened the door for the 1978 Israeli-Egyptian peace summit convened at Camp David by President Carter. These negotiations resulted in agreements called the Camp David Accords that led to a 1979 peace treaty between Israel and Egypt. Pursuant to this treaty, signed by President Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel, Israel withdrew from the Sinai in 1982. In the years following the 1948 war, Israel's border with Lebanon was quiet relative to its borders with other neighbors. After the expulsion of Palestinian PLO fighters from Jordan in 1970 and their influx into southern Lebanon, however, hostilities along Israel's northern border increased and Israeli forces crossed into Lebanon. After passage of Security Council Resolution 425, calling for Israeli withdrawal and the creation of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon peacekeeping force (UNIFIL), Israel withdrew its troops.

In June 1982, following a series of cross-border terrorist attacks and the attempted assassination of the Israeli Ambassador to the U.K., Israel invaded Lebanon to fight the forces of Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization under the direction of Israel's Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. The PLO withdrew its forces from Lebanon in August 1982. Israel, having failed to finalize an agreement with Lebanon, withdrew most of its troops in June 1985 save for a residual force which remained in southern Lebanon to act as a buffer against attacks on northern Israel. After the cease fire, hundreds of Palestinians in Lebonese refugee camps were massacred by Lebanese Christians, former allies of Israel in the campaign against the PLO in Lebanon. In 1987, violent demonstrations, strikes, and riots broke out in the Occupied Territories, particularly in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which violence became known subsequently as the Intifada. The remaining Israeli forces in Lebanon were completely withdrawn in May 2000 behind a UN-brokered delineation of the Israel-Lebanon border (the Blue Line). Hizballah forces in Southern Lebanon continued to attack Israeli positions south of the Blue Line in the Sheba Farms/Har Dov area of the Golan Heights.

The victory of the U.S.-led coalition in the Persian Gulf War of 1991 opened new possibilities for regional peace. In October 1991, the United States and the Soviet Union convened the Madrid Conference, in which Israeli, Lebanese, Jordanian, Syrian, and Palestinian leaders laid the foundations for ongoing negotiations designed to bring peace and economic development to the region. Within this framework, Israel and the PLO signed a Declaration of Principles on September 13, 1993, which established an ambitious set of objectives relating to a transfer of authority from Israel to an interim Palestinian authority. Israel and the PLO subsequently signed the Gaza-Jericho Agreement on May 4, 1994, and the Agreement on Preparatory Transfer of Powers and Responsibilities on August 29, 1994, which began the process of transferring authority from Israel to the Palestinians. On October 26, 1994, Israel and Jordan signed a historic peace treaty, witnessed by President Clinton. This was followed by Israeli Prime Minister Rabin and PLO Chairman Arafat's signing of the historic Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on September 28, 1995. This accord, which incorporated and superseded previous agreements, broadened Palestinian self-government and provided for cooperation between Israel and the Palestinians in several areas.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated on November 4, 1995, by a right-wing Jewish radical Israeli student, bringing the increasingly bitter national debate over the peace process to a climax. Subsequent Israeli governments continued to negotiate with the PLO resulting in additional agreements, granting concessions to the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), headed by Yasir Arafat, leader of the PLO. However, ongoing Israeli-Palestinian violence led to a crisis of confidence between the two sides, which continued into 2001. Suicide bombings by Palestinian militants that began in 1996 influenced Israeli public opinion to reject additional compromises being granted to the PNA and led to the election of Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister in Israel. However, the peace process stalled under Netanyahu's leadership, and he was succeeded by Ehud Barak, leader of the Labor party, as Prime Minister. A summit hosted by President Clinton at Camp David in July 2000 to address permanent status issues--including the status of Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, final security arrangements, borders, and relations and cooperation with neighboring states--failed to produce an agreement. Following the failed talks, widespread violence broke out in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza in September 2000, a second Intifada known as the Al Aqsa Intifada. Barak resigned as Prime Minister in December 2000. Ariel Sharon was subsequently elected Prime Minister in February 2001, campaigning on Israeli security as a priority. His administration has been characterized by its belief in the futility of negotiated peace and its immediate and overwhelming military responses to terrorist attacks.

Originally, crimes were divided into felonies, misdemeanors, and contraventions in Israel. A felony was a crime with a minimum punishment of imprisonment of more than three years; a misdemeanor was a crime with a minimum punishment of imprisonment of more than one month and up to three years; a contravention was an offense with a maximum punishment of imprisonment up to one month. According to the current law, there has been a change in the definition of misdemeanors and contraventions. A misdemeanor is a crime with a minimum punishment of imprisonment for more than three months and up to three years; and a contravention is an offense with a maximum punishment of imprisonment for up to three months or a fine of up to 7,000 N.S. (approximately $2,300). Some offenses have been selected as finable offenses with either an option of fine or an option of trial. Only misdemeanors or contraventions can be designated as finable offenses, and there is a limit on the amount of fine that can be imposed in this kind of offense. To date the following offenses have been selected as offenses for which a fine may be imposed: most of the traffic law offenses, contraventions of municipal by-laws, some offenses under tourist laws, offenses against the anti-smoking law, and some offenses concerning the environment such as pollution of the sea and sea-shore.

The age of criminal responsibility in Israel is 12 years of age. The Youth Law codifies the special procedures and punishments or treatments that are to be used concerning minors. Minors are generally tried before Juvenile Courts, and there is no waiver procedure in Israel. There are also special rules in relation to the registration of criminal records of youth offenders and the time limits concerning the delivery of information about their criminal records and on the prescription and extinction of the said records.

The Dangerous Drugs Ordinance includes three main categories of offenses: (1) possession of drugs for own consumption and misuse of drugs, (2) drug trafficking and (3) enticement of minors to misuse of drugs or to traffic in drugs. According to this ordinance the term drugs includes all the natural narcotic drugs, e.g. marihuana, hashish, opium and cocaine and their man-made derivatives, and psychotropic drugs contained on the first two lists of the UN Psychotropic Substances Convention, 1971. The offenses included in the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance include the following: manufacture, cultivation, production, preparation, extraction, possession, use, export, import, trade, supply, transaction, acting as go-between, conveying in transit, diversion, moving a drug in transit and tampering with a drug in transit, if all or any of these acts are done without a permit or a license as established in the Ordinance. The most serious of the offenses is either the enticement of minors to misuse drugs, or instigating them to obtain or misuse drugs. The punishments established for drug offenses are as follows: possession for own consumption or misuse--3 years imprisonment; trafficking--20 years imprisonment; enticement of minors--25 years imprisonment. In addition to the prison terms cited above, the courts are entitled to fine drug traffickers very severely, up to the amount of N. S. 2,725,000 (approximately $908,000). Finally, since l989, when the Law Amending the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (No. 3), 5749-1989, was adopted, the courts may order the forfeiture of some or all property connected directly or indirectly with a drug trafficking offense. The definition of property in this context embraces all kinds of property: movable, immovable, rights, and money. This general property forfeiture order may be given only after the defendant has been convicted and declared by the court a drug trafficker. In cases in which there is no conviction or no such declaration, the court has nevertheless the right to declare forfeit property directly connected with any drug offense; for that purpose there is thus the possibility of choosing between forfeiture through a civil proceeding or through a criminal proceeding.

The crime rate in Israel is considered moderate compared to other industrialized countries. According to the United Nations Sixth Annual Survey on Crime, crime recorded in police statistics shows the crime rate for the grand total of recorded crimes in Israel to be 6,276.25, per 100,000 inhabitants in 1997. This compares with 1,506.50 for Japan (country with a low crime rate) and 9,622.10 for USA (country with high crime rate). For intentional homicides, the rate in 1997 was 2.67 for Israel, 0.54 for Japan, and 6.80 for USA. For major assaults, the rate in 1997 was 195.00 for Israel, compared with 382.31 for USA (no data given for Japan). For rapes, the rate in 1997 was 8.80 for Israel, 1.31 for Japan, and 35.93 for USA. For robberies, the rate in 1997 was 27.02 for Israel, 2.23 for Japan, and 186.27 for USA. For automobile theft, the rate in 1997 was 786.94 for Israel, 213.49 for Japan, and 505.99 for USA. The rate of burglaries for 1997 was highest of the three countries at 1153.77 for Israel, 175.81 for Japan, and 919.35 for USA. No data were reported for thefts.

Between 1995 and 1997, according to the Sixth Annual Survey, the rate for all recorded crime increased from 5,385.21 to 6,276.25 per 100,000 in Israel, an increase of 16.5%. The rate of intentional homicide increased from 2.02 to 2.67, an increase of 32.2%. However, the rate for intentional assaults increased from 28.42 to 195.00, an increase of 586.1%. On the other hand, the rate of rape decreased from 9.49 to 8.89, a decrease of 6.3%. The rate for robberies increased from 18.56 to 27.02 per 100,000, an increase of 45.6%. The rate for automobile theft increased from 597.73 to 786.94, an increase of 31.7%. The rate of burglaries increased from 860.94 to 1,153.77, an increase of 34%. No data were reported by Israel for thefts.

The Israeli legal system, although Western in culture, belongs neither to the Common Law nor to the Civil Law families of legal systems. Rather it is characterized as belonging to the family of mixed jurisdictions. The history of Israel explains the reasons for the hybrid nature of the system. For approximately four centuries, until the end of the first World War, the area now constituting Israel was part of the Ottoman Empire ruled by Turkey. During this period the law of the land was a mixture of traditional Islamic law and modern European laws (German, French and Swiss) adopted by Turkey mainly from the beginning of the last century. Following the defeat of Turkey, a British Mandate was established according to a resolution of the League of Nations. The Mandatory government gradually replaced the pre-existing law with legislation supplemented by English principles of common law and equity. While most areas of law have been Anglicized, the British kept intact the Ottoman system of family law, which authorized religious courts of the different religious communities to administer their specific laws on members of these communities.

In 1948, the State of Israel was established as a Jewish and democratic state. Although pre-existing law was retained at first by the independent State of Israel, new legislation enacted by the Knesset (Israel's parliament), as well as decisions of the Supreme Court, have completely transformed the legal system into a modern and sophisticated system. Although common law applies as a basis, the law has been significantly influenced by the people involved in its development, many of whom received their legal education in continental Europe. The Israeli Declaration of Independence, issued on May 14, 1948, following the termination of the British mandate over Palestine, envisioned the existence of a future formal constitution for Israel. The declaration, however, has never been viewed as a constitutional document by itself. It was interpreted by the Supreme Court to be a document incorporating the wishes and the intent of the founding fathers of the reborn state. As such, it did not grant the judiciary the power of striking down legislation which clearly negates its content. However, if legislation may be interpreted in several ways, the Court holds that laws should be interpreted in a way consistent with the principles expressed in the Declaration. Utilizing the latter method, the Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as a high court of justice, has managed to develop fundamental constitutional principles that in other Western democracies are protected by constitutions.

By virtue of the Harrari Resolution of 1950, the Knesset agreed that the Israeli constitution contain separate chapters, each called a “basic law.” To date, eleven such laws have been passed concerning: The Knesset, Israel Lands, the President of the State, the Government, the State Economy, the Army, Jerusalem Capital of Israel, the Judiciary, the State Comptroller, Human Dignity and Freedom, and Freedom of Occupation. Although there were different views regarding the constitutional status of separate basic laws, the accepted view prior to 1992 was that only the incorporation of all basic laws into a single-document constitution would result in a higher normative status. In a 1995 landmark case (Bank Hamizrahi Hameuchad Ltd. et al. v. Migdal Kfar Shitufi) Israel’s Supreme Court recognized that even before the completion of a single-document constitution two basic laws, Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom and Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation, were of a higher normative status. Most areas of Israeli law are codified. Legislation in Israel does not supplement case law. On the contrary, it is the basis of the system. It not only regulates the problems it addresses, but also forms a source for the creation of new norms by way of analogy. Subject to the two 1992 basic laws discussed above, legislation passed by the Knesset holds the highest normative status. The Israeli judiciary enjoys wide judicial discretion and judicial power to create case law. According to the principle of stare decisis as practiced in Israel, a rule laid down by a court will guide any lower court, and the Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions. The Israeli courts do not use the jury system. All questions of fact and law are determined by the judge or the judges of the court concerned, and the system adheres to the principle of innocent until proven guilty. The Supreme Court, sitting as a high court of justice, enjoys a special status and influence. Israel has left the preexisting law of family relations virtually untouched. Thus, religious law (Jewish, Moslem, Christian, etc.) applies as a source of law in matters relating to marriage and divorce, litigated before religious courts. Such application is subject to the law of the land and to the supervision of the Supreme Court. The State of Israel is described in the Declaration of Independence as both a Jewish State and a democracy which will respect human rights. Although not manifested by full application of Jewish law, the Jewishness of the state nevertheless is manifested by certain legislation and case law. For example, the Law of Return, 1950, provides for the right of every Jew to immigrate to Israel and acquire Israeli citizenship in accordance to the Nationality Law, 1952. In addition, Foundation of Law, 5740-1980 provides that if the court finds no answer to a legal question in statutory law, case law, or by analogy, it “shall decide it in the light of the principles of freedom, justice, equity and peace of Israel’s heritage.”

Local law in the Occupied Territories combines Jordanian and Ottoman legislation and regulations from the Mandate period, greatly extended by Israeli military orders affecting a broad range of political and social activities. The law applies to most criminal and civil matters in the West Bank. In the Gaza Strip, local law is based mainly on British mandatory law, as modified by Israel. Palestinians accused of nonsecurity offenses are tried in the local Arab court system, which consisted of nine magistrate courts, three district courts, and the one Court of Appeal in Ram Allah in the West Bank. In 1985 the magistrate courts decided more than 36,000 cases, the district courts more than 1,300 cases, and the Court of Appeal 1,600 cases. Local courts have no power in cases involving land, and Israeli residents can not be brought to trial or sued in them. Any judicial proceeding can be halted and transferred to a military court by the military government. The local courts have low standing and lack the means to execute court decisions, with the result that in many cases judgments are not implemented.

Internal security is the responsibility of the Israel Security Agency (the ISA--formerly the General Security Service, or GSS, and also known as Shin Bet, or Shabak), which is under the authority of the Prime Minister's office. The police are under the authority of the Minister of Internal Security. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are under the authority of a civilian Minister of Defense. The IDF includes a significant portion of the adult population on active duty or reserve status and plays a role in maintaining internal security. The Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in the Knesset reviews the activities of the IDF and the ISA. The Israel National Police Force (INP) is organized on a national and district level. The head of the INP is the Commissioner of Police, who is appointed by the Government on recommendation of the Minister of Police. There are six departments that constitute the INP's national headquarters: Investigations, Operation and Patrol, Logistics, Personnel, Planning and Organization, the Border Guard and the Civil Guard. Other units attached to the national headquarters are: the office of the Legal Counsel, the Office of the Spokesperson, Accounting, the Office of the Internal Auditor and Ombudsman, the Internal Disciplinary Court and the Internal Appeals Court. The regional administration of the INP is divided into five District Commands: Jerusalem, Northern, Central, Southern and Tel Aviv. The District Commanders are directly responsible to the Police Commissioner. These Districts are divided into 13 Subdistricts each of which is under the direction of a Police Commander. The Subdistricts are, in turn, divided into Police Stations and Police Precincts. Each of the Districts and Sub-districts is managed by an administrative and operation headquarters that parallels the organization of the central INP headquarters in Jerusalem. The Civil Guard, which is a volunteer force for the maintenance of security on the home front within the framework of the INP, and the Border Guard, which is a special military unit in the INP, have a special organization and administration, separate from the INP. The INP is well provided with electronic equipment, including computer-aided dispatch, computer records, and radio communications. A secondary degree, (high school diploma), is required in order to enter the Police Force. Recruits are given a basic course of three months. All further advancements to non-commissioned officers or to officers require special training courses. There are also courses for special activities such as anti-terrorist fighting and drug detection. Policemen on duty generally carry a gun. When rioting is expected, they may also carry batons and protective clothing. Use of force is permitted according to the present law and there is no intention to change the law on this point.

Presently the powers of arrest without warrant of a police officer are quite broad and include the following: he has reasonable grounds to believe that a person has committed a felony; a person has committed in his presence an offense punishable by at least six months in prison; a person obstructs him in the execution of his duty; a person has escaped, or attempts to escape, from lawful custody or is pursued by hue and cry; a person believed to have committed an offense refuses to give his name and address or to accompany him to a police station after being asked to do so; a person is found in suspicious circumstances or, having no visible means of subsistence, cannot satisfactorily account for himself. Two concerns are taken into account for the further processing of a suspect in the criminal system: the existence of prima facie evidence linking the suspect to the crime and the public interest in bringing him to trial. The decision for continuing the legal process is in the hands of senior prosecutors in the Police Department or in the District Attorney's Office. A prosecuting officer may caution a suspect rather than indict if he decides that because the public interest will be better served in this way.

Police may search or seize property with a judicial warrant, or while performing an arrest. Without a warrant a police officer may enter and search any house or place if: (1) he has reason to believe that a felony is being committed or has recently been committed; (2) the occupier calls for police assistance; (3) any person therein calls for the assistance of the police, and there is reason to believe that an offense is being committed therein; (4) he is pursuing a person evading arrest or escaping from lawful custody. A police officer may seize any article if he has reasonable grounds for believing that an offense has been committed, or is about to be committed, by means of that article, or that it may serve as evidence in a legal proceeding in respect of any offense or that it has been given as a remuneration for committing or a means for committing an offense. Special search powers are given to the Police in connection with drug offenses and in order to protect the public security against terrorist attacks. There are also special search powers related to airports and seaports.

Prior to obtaining a confession or a statement, the suspect is warned that anything that is said may be used against him in a court of law. Furthermore, the confession of the accused is admissible in court only when the prosecution has produced evidence as to the circumstances in which it was made and the court is satisfied that it was free and voluntary. According to the law in Israel, there is no rule prohibiting the use of evidence irregularly obtained; otherwise known as the "fruit of the poisoned tree" rule. The rule concerning confessions was adopted out of concern over unauthorized electronic eavesdropping or unauthorized infringement of privacy.

Complaints against police behavior are handled by a special department of the Ministry of Justice in charge of investigating such complaints. This department may, after reviewing the charges, order that the police officer be tried either on disciplinary charges or indicted in a regular court of law. The decisions of the investigating department are open to administrative review, and, through a petition to the High Court of Justice, also to judicial review.

Members of the security forces have committed serious human rights abuses in the Occupied Territories and regarding Palestinian detainees. Laws and administrative regulations prohibit the physical abuse of detainees; however, human rights organizations, including B'tselem, Human Rights Watch, Palestinian Society for the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment (LAW), and the Mandela Institute for Political Prisoners have reported allegations that security forces tortured detainees. There also have been numerous allegations that police officers beat detainees. The Government states that the security forces have complied with the High Court's decision and that the Attorney General's office investigates any allegations of mistreatment. Although it is not clear that any formal complaints of torture have been filed, human rights groups point out that no GSS agent has been criminally charged with torture or other ill-treatment for the past several years. Human rights groups further complain that the investigators who do field work for the Attorney General's office on such claims are GSS agents.

The law prohibits arbitrary arrest; however, in some instances, the Israeli Government has not observed this prohibition. Defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty and have the right to writs of habeas corpus and other procedural safeguards. However, a 1979 law permits, subject to judicial review, administrative, or preventive, detention (i.e., without charge or trial), which is used in a small percentage of security cases. In such cases, the Minister of Defense may issue a detention order for a maximum of 1 year, although such orders may be extended. Within 24 hours of issuance, detainees must appear before a district judge who may confirm, shorten, or overturn the order. If the order is confirmed, an automatic review takes place after 3 months. Detainees have the right to be represented by counsel and to appeal detention orders to the High Court of Justice; however, the security forces may delay notification of counsel with the consent of a judge. According to human rights groups and legal experts, there have been cases in which a judge denied the Government's request to delay notification of counsel. At detention hearings, the security forces may withhold evidence from defense lawyers on security grounds. The Government also may seek to renew administrative detention orders. However, the security services must "show cause" for continued detention, and, in some instances, individuals were released because the standard could not be met.

In felony cases and in ordinary security cases, a district court judge may postpone for 48 hours the notification of arrest to the detainee's attorney. The Minister of Defense may extend the postponement to 7 days on national security grounds or by the police inspector general to conduct an investigation. Moreover, a judge may postpone notification for up to 15 days in national security cases.

The 1997 Arrest and Detention Law more narrowly defined the grounds for pretrial detention in criminal and security cases and reduced to 24 hours the length of time a person may be held without charge; however, this law does not extend to administrative detention cases. Human rights groups have alleged abuse of detention orders in cases in which the accused did not pose a clear danger to society.

In the Occupied Territories, Israeli security personnel may arrest without warrant or hold for questioning a person suspected of having committed a criminal or security offense. Most of these arrests and detentions are for alleged security offenses. Persons arrested for common crimes usually are provided with a statement of charges and access to an attorney, and may apply for bail. However, these procedures in some cases are delayed.

Israeli authorities intermittently have issued special summonses for those suspected of involvement in or knowledge of security offenses. There were reports that some such summonses were issued immediately before and during the Intifada. Israeli military order 1369 provides for a 7-year prison term for anyone who does not respond to a special summons delivered to a family member or posted in the MATAK office nearest the suspect's home address. There have been no reports that any person was convicted of failing to respond to a summons. Bail rarely is available to those arrested for security offenses.

Although Israeli law does not allow Israelis under the age of 16 to be tried as adults, Israeli courts treat Palestinians more than the age of 12 as adults. Defense for Children International (DCI) reported that over 500 Palestinian minors (below the age of 18 years) were arrested and detained in Israeli prisons during the year 2000, and that at year's end, there were approximately 160 minors in Israeli prisons. The IDF stated that it held 102 Palestinian minors in detention as of early December. The Israeli Prisons Service Facilities held 14 minor prisoners and detainees as of early December. Some discrepancy in the number of minors held is attributable to the different definitions of what age constitutes a Palestinian minor.

Israeli authorities may hold persons in custody without a warrant for 96 hours; following that time, they must be released unless a warrant is issued. Prearraignment detention may last up to 11 days for Palestinians arrested in the Occupied Territories and up to 8 days for minors and those accused of less serious offenses. Authorities must obtain a court order for longer administrative detentions--up to 6 months from the date of arrest. At hearings to extend detention for interrogation purposes, detainees are entitled to be represented by counsel, although defense attorneys often are not allowed to see or hear the evidence against their clients. Detainees either are released at the end of the court-ordered detention or sent to administrative detention if they are not indicted. If there is an indictment, a judge may order indefinite detention until the end of the trial. Israeli regulations permit detainees to be held in isolation during interrogation. Detainees have the right to appeal continued detention.

Although a detainee generally has the right to consult with a lawyer as soon as possible, in security cases authorities may delay access to counsel for up to 15 days. Higher-ranking officials or judges may extend this period. Access to counsel is denied routinely while a suspect is being interrogated, which may last up to several weeks. Authorities must inform detainees of their right to an attorney and whether there are any orders prohibiting such contact.

A number of factors hamper contacts by Palestinians in Israeli prison and detention facilities with their lawyers, families, and human rights organizations. Israeli authorities state that they attempt to post notification of arrest within 48 hours; however, Palestinian suspects often are kept incommunicado for longer than 48 hours. Even if family members or others become aware of a person's arrest, it often is difficult for them to obtain information regarding where a detainee is being held or whether the detainee has access to an attorney. Palestinians generally locate detained family members through their own efforts. Palestinians may check with a local International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) office to determine whether it has information regarding the whereabouts of a family member. A senior officer may delay for up to 12 days notification of arrest to immediate family members and attorneys. A military commander may appeal to a judge to extend this period in security cases for an unlimited period of time.

The Israeli Government routinely transfers Palestinians arrested in the Occupied Territories to facilities in Israel, especially the prison in Ashkelon and the military detention center in Megiddo. Such transfers contravene international humanitarian law. Israeli authorities in some instances scheduled appointments between attorneys and their detained clients, only to move the clients to another prison prior to the meetings. Authorities reportedly use such tactics to delay lawyer-client meetings for as long as 90 days. Palestinian lawyers also have difficulty traveling to meet with their clients during Israeli-imposed closures, which were in place for most of the year. Israel requires Palestinian attorneys to obtain permits to enter Israel to see their clients held in prisons there. Human rights groups state that Palestinian lawyers from the Gaza Strip have a more difficult time obtaining these permits than their West Bank counterparts and that they are denied entry into Israel more frequently than West Bank lawyers. Since the beginning of the Intifada, West Bank lawyers have not been permitted to visit Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, although Palestinian lawyers with valid Jerusalem identification cards have been permitted to do so. This has significantly reduced the availability and timeliness of legal counsel for such prisoners.

Male family members between 16 and 40 years of age, and any family members with security records, generally are barred from visiting relatives in facilities in Israel. Relatives of Palestinian prisoners also state that in some instances they learn that visitation rights have been canceled only when they arrive at the prison after travelling for many hours from the Occupied Territories. Following the outbreak of violence in late September 2000, the Israeli Government banned all family visits for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, although some visitation rights were restored after ICRC interventions.

Persons held on security grounds are not granted bail and are denied access to counsel or other outside contacts for a period of eighteen days, during which they can be held in custody without formal charges. Access can be denied indefinitely if the authorities believe access will impede the investigation. Many security cases involve secret evidence, access to which is denied to the accused and to his attorney. Convictions often are based on confessions recorded in Hebrew, which most prisoners do not understand. International human rights organizations complain of systematic mistreatment of prisoners held on security grounds. Amnesty International reports that agents of Shin Bet extract confessions by beatings, extended solitary confinement, immersion in cold water, and "hoodings." In most security cases, confessions are the only evidence leading to conviction. The military authorities also can impose administrative detentions and deportations.

Israeli law provides for an independent judiciary, and the Government generally respects this provision. Israeli law provides normal guarantees for its citizens against arbitrary arrest and imprisonment. Writs of habeas corpus and other safeguards against violations of due process exist. Confessions extracted by torture and other forms of duress are inadmissible as evidence in court. The Criminal Procedure Law of 1965 described general provisions with regard to application of law, pretrial and trial procedure, and appeal. It supplemented the Courts Law of 1957, which prescribed the composition, jurisdiction, and functioning of the court system and provided details of appellate remedies and procedures.

All secular courts in Israel deal with criminal as well as civil matters. The magistrate courts decide about 150,000 criminal cases in 1985. The district courts decide about 12,500 criminal cases in the first instance and 3,700 as appeal cases. The Supreme Court decides approximately 2,000 criminal cases of all kinds. The average lapse of time between committing an offense and conviction was nineteen months in magistrate courts and eleven months in district courts.

Punishments for convicted criminals include suspended sentences, fines, a choice of imprisonment or fine, imprisonment and fine, or imprisonment. The death penalty can be imposed for treason or for conviction for Nazi war crimes but, as of 1988, Eichmann was the only person to be executed as the result of a judicial process. Prison sentences are mandatory only for exceptional crimes, such as attacking a policeman. Only a small percentage of criminal convictions actually result in incarceration, and sentences are relatively short. In 1986 more than half of the prison terms were for one year or less and 96 percent were for fewer than five years. Sentences by military tribunals were more harsh; terms of fifteen years to life imprisonment were not unusual.

Warrants generally are required for arrests and searches, although a person can be arrested without a warrant if there is reason to suspect that he or she had committed a felony, is a fugitive from justice, or is apprehended in the act of committing an offense. A person so arrested has to be brought before a judge within forty-eight hours; the judge can order the prisoner's release, with or without bail, or can authorize further detention for a period up to fifteen days. Authorization for detention can be renewed for an additional fifteen-day period, but any further extension requires the approval of the attorney general. Administrative detention can be used in security-related cases when formally charging a person will compromise sensitive sources of information. Unless detained for an offense punishable by death or life imprisonment, an arrested person can be released on bail, which can take the form of personal recognizance, cash deposit, surety bond, or any combination thereof. A person held in custody must be released unconditionally if trial has not commenced within sixty days or if it has not ended within one year from the date on which a statement of charge had been filed. Only a judge of the Supreme Court can order an extension of these time limitations.

In felony cases, arrests can be kept secret for reasons of national security upon request of the minister of defense. Representation by counsel in such cases can be delayed up to seven days and up to fifteen days in terrorist-related cases. Offenses committed by civilians against emergency regulations (which have been in effect since the state of emergency in force at the founding of the nation in 1948) are tried by military courts composed of three commissioned officers. Until 1963 the judgments of such courts were final, but at that time the right of appeal was granted under an amendment to the Military Justice Law. Individuals charged with offenses against the Prevention of Infiltration Law are tried by a military court consisting of a single officer; appeals are heard by a court composed of three officers.

Magistrate court cases generally are tried before a single judge. Cases in the Supreme Court are heard by panels of three judges as were appeals cases in district courts and cases where the maximum sentence is ten years or more. There are no juries in Israeli courts. Persons accused of crimes punishable by imprisonment of ten years or more, juveniles, and persons unable to afford private counsel can be represented by a lawyer appointed by the court. In pleading, defendants can remain silent or can testify under oath in their own behalf, in which case they are subject to cross-examination. They can also make statements upon which they can not be examined.

The District Court sits as a court of first instance and as an appellate court on the judgments of the Magistrates’ Court. It also hears appeals on judicial and quasi-judicial decisions of the Administrative Tribunals and other different bodies, by virtue of the powers conferred specifically upon it by law.

As a court of first instance, the District Court has a kind of residual jurisdiction. It has jurisdiction in any matter not within the jurisdiction of the Magistrates’ Court and which is not within the sole jurisdiction of another court.

The District Court has jurisdiction in any criminal matter not within the jurisdiction of the Magistrates’ Court. These are, essentially, cases of serious criminal offenses, in which the penalty for the offense is the death penalty or imprisonment for a period of more than seven years.

The Supreme Court is at the head of the court system in the State. It is the highest judicial instance. The Supreme Court sits in Jerusalem. The area of its jurisdiction is the entire State. A ruling of the Supreme Court is binding upon every court, other than the Supreme Court itself. This is the principle of binding precedent (stare decisis) obtaining in Israel.

The number of Supreme Court justices is determined by a resolution of the Knesset. Usually, twelve justices serve in the Supreme Court. At the present time there are fourteen Supreme Court justices. At the head of the Supreme Court and at the head of the judicial system as a whole stands the President of the Supreme Court, and at his side, the Deputy President. The Supreme Court is an appellate court, as well as the High Court of Justice. As an appellate court, the Supreme Court considers cases on appeal (both criminal and civil) on judgments and other decisions of the District Courts. As the High Court of Justice, the Supreme Court rules as a court of first instance, primarily in matters regarding the legality of decisions of State authorities: Government decisions, those of local authorities and other bodies and persons performing public functions under the law. It rules on matters in which it considers it necessary to grant relief in the interests of justice, and which are not within the jurisdiction of another court or tribunal.

The trial of an offense with which a minor is charged is heard in the District or Magistrates’ Court, depending on the severity of the offense. The trial is heard by judges who serve, by special appointment of the President of the Supreme Court, with the consent of the Minister of Justice, and judges of Juvenile Courts. Unlike the usual rule that court proceedings are held in Public, the Juvenile Court sits "in camera." Where a Juvenile Court finds that the minor committed the offense, it directs the submission of a report of a probation officer. After receiving the report, the court decides whether to convict and sentence the minor, or whether to order one or more the the measures and modes of treatment enumerated in the law, or discharge the minor without such an order. Where a minor has been convicted, a Juvenile Court may, instead of imposing imprisonment on him, order that he be kept in a closed home for a period prescribed by it. Where an offense has been committed by a person who on the day of committing it was a minor, the death penalty shall not be imposed nor is there any requirement, notwithstanding anything provided in any law, to impose imprisonment for life, mandatory imprisonment or a minimum penalty.

Palestinians accused by Israel of security offenses in the Occupied Territories are tried in Israeli military courts. Security offenses are defined broadly and may include charges as varied as stone-throwing or membership in outlawed organizations. Military prosecutors bring charges. Serious charges are tried before three-judge panels; lesser offenses are tried before one judge. The Israeli military courts rarely acquit Palestinians of security offenses, but sentences in some cases are reduced on appeal. The 1970 regulations governing Israeli military trials allow for evidentiary rules that are the same as in criminal cases. Convictions may not be based solely on confessions, although in practice some security prisoners have been sentenced on the basis of the coerced confessions of both themselves and others. The prosecution must justify closing the proceedings to the public in such cases, and the Attorney General determines the venue. The accused may be assisted by counsel, and a judge may assign counsel to those defendants when it is deemed necessary. Charges are made available to the defendant and the public in Hebrew, and the court may order that the charges be translated into Arabic if necessary. Sentencing in military courts is consistent with that in criminal courts. Defendants in military trials have the right to appeal through the Military High Court. Defendants in military trials also may petition to the civilian High Court of Justice (sitting as a court of first instance) in cases in which they believe there are procedural or evidentiary irregularities. The court may here secret evidence in security cases that is not available to the defendant or his attorney; however, while a conviction may not be based solely on such evidence, it reportedly may influence the judge's decision. Trials sometimes are delayed because witnesses, including Israeli military or police officers, do not appear, the defendant is not brought to court, files are lost, or attorneys fail to appear, sometimes because they have not been informed of the trial date or travel restrictions prevent Palestinian lawyers reaching the court. These delays pressure some defendants to plead guilty to minor offenses so that an expedited trial may be held; in expedited trials a charge sheet is drawn up within 48 hours and a court hearing is scheduled within days. There frequently is no testimony provided by Palestinian witnesses either for or against Palestinians on trial. Israeli authorities maintain that this is due to the refusal of Palestinians to cooperate with the authorities. Tension resulting from the current security situation, and the closures imposed on the West Bank and Gaza, pose additional barriers to cooperation. Physical and psychological pressures and reduced sentences for those who confess may induce security detainees to sign confessions. Confessions usually are given in Arabic but translated into Hebrew for the record because, authorities maintain, many Israeli court personnel speak Arabic but few read it. As a result, many Palestinian prisoners sign confessions written in Hebrew, which they cannot read or understand. Crowded facilities and poor arrangements for attorney-client consultations in prisons hinder legal defense efforts. Appointments to see clients are difficult to arrange, and prison authorities often fail to produce clients for scheduled appointments. Israeli settlers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip accused of security and ordinary criminal offenses are tried under Israeli law in the nearest Israeli district court. Civilian judges preside, and the standards of due process and admissibility of evidence are governed by the laws of Israel, not military orders. Settlers rarely are prosecuted in Israeli courts of crimes against Palestinians, and, in the rare instances in which they are convicted, regularly receive lighter punishment than Palestinians convicted in Israeli courts of similar crimes against either Israelis or other Palestinians. The Government of Israel stated that it established a special department within the police force to investigate violence by settlers; however, the establishment of such a unit has not noticeably diminished the problem.

The penal system of both Israel and the Occupied Territories is administered by the Israel Prison Service, a branch of the Ministry of Interior independent of the Israel Police. It is headed by the commissioner of prisons. The prison system was originally set up in 1926 as part of the British Mandate police force. Many of the prisons still in use were built in the 1930s by the British authorities. Outside the authority of the Prison Service are police lockups located in every major town and military detention centers in Israel and the Occupied Territories.

As of January 1, 1987, the Prison Service operated thirteen prisons and detention centers in Israel and eight penitentiaries in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Palestinians of the Occupied Territories serving sentences of more than five years are incarcerated in maximum security prisons within Israel. The prison population in Israel is 3,837 and in the Occupied Territories is 4,527. Neve Tirza, the sole facility for women, has ninety-seven inmates.

These totals do not include the sizable numbers of Palestinians who are being held in military detention centers. As of mid-1988 about half of the detainees were confined at Ketziot, a tent camp in the Negev Desert close to the Egyptian border, which held at least 2,500 prisoners. A large number of rock-throwing juveniles were held at Ansar 2, a camp in the Gaza Strip. As described in the Israeli press and by visiting human rights officials, tension among the detainees at Ketziot--many of them business and professional people--was high owing to petty humiliations, boredom, severe climatic conditions, overcrowding, and isolation. No radios, watches, or books were permitted. Punishment included periods of exposure to the fierce desert sun, but beatings and brutality were said to be rare.

Israeli prisons are chronically overcrowded; violence and abuse on the part of the staff are common. As of the early 1980s, an American specialist described the available occupational and rehabilitation facilities as only nominal. An investigative commission appointed by the Supreme Court reported in 1981 that "the condition of the prisons is so serious, subhuman, and on the verge of explosion that it calls for a revolutionary change in the way prisons are run." Conditions were especially bad in two of the four maximum security penitentiaries, Beersheba, the largest prison in Israel, and Ram Allah. At Beersheba the commission found severe lack of sanitation, drug smuggling, and close confinement with almost no opportunity for exercise. The commission recommended the demolition of the Ram Allah penitentiary as unfit for human habitation.

Palestinian and international human rights groups have complained of widespread and systematic mistreatment of Arab prisoners. Periodic hunger strikes have been undertaken by Palestinian prisoners demanding the same basic privileges as Jewish inmates.

A number of new prisons were completed during the early 1980s and, as of 1987, construction of a new prison hospital was underway, as were new wings at several existing prisons. The increased accommodation would, however, do little more than provide space for a rising prison population. During 1986 the total number of inmates had risen by 587 while new construction added 670 spaces in the prison system.

Supplementary courses to enable prisoners to complete elementary or secondary education were available and completed successfully by nearly 1,000 inmates in 1986. In some prisons, employment is available in small-scale enterprises operated by the prison service or by private entrepreneurs. About 2,700 prisoners are employed in some fashion. A total of 500 inmates participated in vocational training in 1986 in a variety of trades, including carpentry, bookbinding, printing, tailoring, and shoemaking.

Furloughs are granted for good behavior; 15,000 permits for home leave were issued in 1986. A temporary parole often is allowed non-security prisoners after serving one-third of their sentences. After completing two-thirds of their sentences, such prisoners can earn a permanent parole for good behavior. Although parole privileges are not extended to those convicted of security offenses, the president has the power to grant pardons and, on occasion, group amnesties are offered to security prisoners.

During 1986 about 40 percent of the prisoners in Israel were serving sentences for crimes against property and a further 19 percent for drug trafficking or possession. In the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, nearly 36 percent had been convicted of terrorist or hostile activity, although many others were serving sentences for related crimes, such as use of explosives and Molotov cocktails, armed infiltration, and endangering state security. Less than 6 percent had been convicted of property offenses.

Every prisoner is delegated a social worker to see to his particular needs. The caseworker will make use of various techniques - dynamic, behavioral, cognitive and others. The social worker must meet with the prisoner at least three times during his imprisonment - at its beginning, before he begins his program of rehabilitation and near the time of his release. Above this minimum, the number of meetings will depend on the attitude, motivation and difficulties of the prisoner and the work load of the social worker.

The main problems dealt with in group therapy are: domestic violence, incest, sexual offenses, drug and alcohol abuse, mutual help between inmates, preparation for release, interpersonal communication, husband-wife-children interrelationships.

Educational programs are designed to realize the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) policy that education can provide the prisoner with new coping resources, can enable him to make positive use of his time in prison, develop insight and recognize and reinforce dormant talents. Education can be an agent of change and its effects felt in all aspects of the prisoner's life.

In the first stage of rehabilitation, the prisoner goes out as one of a group escorted by a senior prison officer. If he satisfies the terms of such groups and performs well with no lapses, then he will transfer to an individual rehabilitation track, whereby he will go out to work or study alone and unescorted to cope by himself with the pressures of work or study. In the third stage he will live in a hostel and spend each weekend on home leave with his family.

The law prohibits domestic violence; however, violence against women is a problem, despite the steps taken by the Israeli Government and other organizations to reduce violence against women in Jewish and Arab communities.

Twenty-one women were killed by their husbands or other male relatives during 1988. According to one prominent women's group, between 150,000 and 200,000 women and girls are victims of domestic violence each year; an estimated 7 percent of them are abused on a regular basis. According to women's organizations, approximately 2,800 women and girls were assaulted sexually and approximately 1,200 were victims of incest during 1988; an estimated 44 percent of them were girls under the age of 18. Only a small percentage of the victims complained to the police. According to the Domestic Violence Law, a district or magistrate court may prohibit access by violent family members to their property.

Government funding to combat such violence increased significantly in 1998 but has remained level since. In 1998 the Government appointed a commission to address the subject of domestic violence; on the basis of the commission's recommendations, the Government allotted a supplementary budget allocation to combat domestic violence during this year.

Rape is illegal. While sentences handed down to men convicted of rape have increased in recent years, some women's rights activists argue that the penalties are not sufficiently severe. In June 1988, the Knesset amended the law to simplify the definition of rape as a crime. The Knesset also amended laws in order to facilitate the delivery of welfare benefits to women staying in shelters. The amendment also prohibited any employer from dismissing an employee during that person's first 6 months of residence in a shelter.

Arab human rights advocates also have formed a coalition to raise public awareness of so-called honor crimes, a violent assault with intent to commit murder against a woman or girls by a relative for her perceived immodest behavior or alleged sexual misconduct. At least 10 of the 11 Arab women killed during 1988 by male relatives were killed in family "honor" cases; families often attempted to cover up the cause of such deaths. NGO's and press accounts reported that the Government investigated and tried the perpetrators of so-called honor crimes.

Prostitution per se is not illegal; however, the operation of brothels and organized sex enterprises is outlawed. Prostitution is a problem. NGO's report that an unknown number, possibly between 100 and 200, of the nation's prostitutes are under the age of 18. Trafficking in women has become a significant problem in recent years. According to recent studies, every year hundreds of women from the former Soviet Union are trafficked to Israel by well-organized criminal networks to work as prostitutes.

In the Occupied Territories, a complex mixture of laws and regulations apply. The law does not explicitly prohibit domestic violence, but beating is a crime; however, anecdotal reports indicate that domestic violence has risen during the Intifada. The problems of rape, domestic violence, and violence related to "family honor" have gained greater attention in the Palestinian community as a result of a significant effort by Palestinian women's groups; however, public discussion generally remains muted. The crimes almost exclusively are tied to alleged sexual interactions of female family members with men who are not their husbands. This could include rape, a sexual encounter with any man except a woman's husband, being seen alone with a male not her family member. Honor crimes result when family members beat or kill women in response to such alleged violations of their family's honor. Victims of violence often are encouraged by relatives to remain quiet and are punished themselves or blamed for the "shame" that has been brought upon them and their families. Women's groups seek to educate women on these problems, but women's rights advocates state that few resources are available to shelter the victims of violence because women's shelters are not accepted culturally in Palestinian society. They also maintain that society has not been receptive to providing counseling or outreach services to victims of violence, which these advocates see as more widespread than is acknowledged. According to women's groups, there are no reliable data on the incidence of violence against women.

Rape is illegal; however, it occurs. No figures are available regarding the extent of the problem. Spousal rape is not explicitly prohibited. Palestinian women endure various forms of social prejudice and repression within their own society. Due to early marriages, some girls, especially in rural areas, do not finish the mandatory level of schooling. Cultural restrictions at times prevent women from attending colleges and universities. Women who marry outside of their faith, particularly Christian women who marry Muslim men, often are disowned by their families and sometimes are harassed and threatened with death by members of their community. Local officials sometimes attempt to convince such women to leave their communities in order to protect themselves.

Before the Intifada began in October 2000, a growing number of Palestinian women were working outside the home, where they often encountered discrimination and occasionally experienced sexual harassment. There are no special laws that provide for women's rights in the workplace. Women are underrepresented in most aspects of professional life. Despite the fact that there is a small group of women who are prominent in politics, medicine, law, teaching, and NGO's, women for the most part are seriously underrepresented in the decision-making positions in these fields.

CHILDREN

The Government has legislated against sexual, physical, and psychological abuse of children and has mandated comprehensive reporting requirements regarding these problems. Although there has been a sharp increase in reported cases of child abuse in recent years, activists believe that this largely is due to increased awareness of the issue rather than a growing pattern of abuse. There are five shelters for children at risk of abuse.

In the Occupied Territories, child abuse is not prohibited explicitly by law; however, abuse exists but is not a widespread problem. Parents or families that fail to protect children from abuse may be penalized by law. PA courts may provide protections for children in "difficult situations," including cases of neglect or abuse. The Ministry of Social Affairs may intervene by bringing a case before a court, which would decide how to best protect the child. The judge may decide to place a child in an official protective institution, or with an alternate family. There is one protective institution for children in Gaza and one in the West Bank.

British Mandate, Jordanian, and military laws, from which West Bank and Gaza law is derived, offer protection to children under the Labor and Penal Codes. Existing laws designed to protect children, such as a law that sets the minimum employment age, are not always. While there is no juvenile court system, judges specializing in children's cases generally sit for juvenile offenders. In cases in which the child is the victim, judges have the discretion to remove the child from a situation considered harmful. However, the system is not advanced in the protection it affords children.

The law prohibits trafficking in women for the purpose of prostitution; however, it is a continuing problem. Women are trafficked to Israel from the former Soviet Union, including Moldova, Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Lithuania; Turkey; South Africa; Brazil; the Dominican Republic; and some countries in Asia. According to Amnesty International (AI), every year hundreds of women from the former Soviet Union are brought to Israel by well-organized criminal networks and forced, often through violence and threats, to work illegally as prostitutes. According to some local NGO's, approximately 500 women are trafficked into the country annually. NGO's have reported that the number of trafficked women entering the country has fallen from previous years, partially due to increased security at border points.

Traffickers reportedly often lure women into traveling to the country by offering them jobs in the service industry. In many cases, traffickers meet women at the border and confiscate all of their official documents. Many trafficked women are forced to live and work under extremely harsh conditions and to give most of the money that they earn to their traffickers. The women reportedly often are raped and beaten, and often are afraid to report their situation to the police because they are in the country illegally. According to press reports, brothels are common despite being illegal. Some victims have accused individual police officers of complicity with brothel owners and traffickers.

In June 2000, the Government enacted a law that prohibits the trafficking of persons for the purpose of prostitution. The law does not prohibit specifically prostitution; however, the operation of brothels and "organized sex enterprises" is outlawed, as are many of the abuses committed by traffickers and pimps, such as assault, rape, abduction, and false imprisonment. The Penal Code stipulates that it is a criminal offense, punishable by between 5 and 7 years' imprisonment, to force or coerce a person to engage in prostitution. The Penal Code also makes it a criminal offense to induce a woman to leave the country with the intent to "practice prostitution abroad." In March 2000, the Knesset passed the Equality of Women Law, which stipulates that every woman is entitled to protection from violence, sexual harassment, sexual exploitation, and trafficking.

During the year 2000, the Government opened 405 files for trafficking and related crimes; most files dealt with multiple victims and suspects--40 of the files specifically included trafficking as a charge. A total of 213 persons were detained for trafficking related crimes during the year 2000 and an additional 981 interrogated; 60 persons were arrested and 39 detained until the beginning of legal proceedings. The Government convicted 12 persons and delivered sentences. In nine cases, the Government settled by plea bargaining with the defendants.

The Government has provided training to immigration officials at Ben Gurion Airport on how to detect women being trafficked into the country. Authorities generally keep trafficked women who are arrested in a special section of a women's prison and then deport them. Since 1997 police have arrested and deported approximately 1,200 women who were trafficked into the country for prostitution. Trafficked women often do not challenge a deportation order because they do not speak the language, or are unaware of the appeals procedure. The Government transfers women who testify against their traffickers to a hotel or hostel and provides them with funds on which to live. However, AI has reported that the Government also has detained some trafficked women for extended periods of time by issuing orders requiring them to remain in the country to testify in criminal proceedings against their traffickers. Many women are reluctant or afraid to testify in trials due to threats and intimidation by their traffickers. The courts have begun to allow victims to submit testimony on video in order to expedite their return home. According to AI, women refuse to testify in court in approximately 90 percent of all the cases that are prosecuted. NGO reports and witness testimony has indicated that the Government does not attempt to determine whether or not a trafficked woman or girl would be at risk of abuse if she were deported to her country of origin, even in cases in which the woman or girl has testified in criminal proceedings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Contributed by Cheryl Meyer