SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
israel
'Profound Moral and Legal Failure': Israeli Supreme Court Rejects Appeal of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya
"If Israel has evidence against Abu Safiya, it should indict him and present that evidence," said the editors of Israel's oldest daily newspaper. "If it doesn't have evidence against him, it needs to release him."
Jun 16, 2026
Defenders of Palestine, human rights, and the rule of law denounced the Israeli Supreme Court's rejection Tuesday of an appeal from Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, the Gaza hospital director imprisoned by Israel for 535 days without charge or trial and allegedly tortured by his captors.
In its decision, Israel's highest court cited a 2002 law allowing the government to detain people it classifies as "unlawful combatants" without charging them with a criminal offense or prosecuting them as prisoners of war.
The Times of Israel reported that because the Supreme Court's decision was based on classified intelligence, it will not be publicly released.
Israel claims Abu Safiya—a 52-year-old pediatrician who was the director of Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia when he was abducted on December 28, 2024 during one of multiple Israeli sieges and assaults on the facility—is a colonel in Gaza's Military Medical Services. Israeli officials cited the service's own records and a 2016 photo showing the doctor wearing a uniform and seated beside members of Hamas, which carried out the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.
However, supporters of Abu Safiya, human rights groups, and many medical organizations contend that "colonel" is a state medical corps rank rather than a combat command role, and note that Hamas' political wing rules Gaza. They point to positions and organizations like the US surgeon general and US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps—which is one of the nation's eight uniformed services but not part of the military—as illustrative of the concept.
“The rejection of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya’s appeal and his continued detention without charge represent a profound moral and legal failure,” said Naji Abbas, director of the Prisoners and Detainees Department at Physicians for Human Rights Israel, following the court's decision.
"Dr. Abu Safiya’s case is not an isolated one. It illustrates how judicial review proceedings for Palestinian detainees from Gaza have, in practice, become little more than a procedural formality," Abbas added. "Every month, hundreds of detention review hearings take place, yet to the best of our knowledge, they have not resulted in the meaningful reconsideration or revocation of detention orders—even in cases involving doctors and other medical personnel."
The Palestinian Center for Prisoners Advocacy said the high court's rejection of Abu Safiya's appeal "constitutes a clear violation of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, which provide special protection for medical personnel during armed conflicts and prohibit their targeting or arbitrary detention for carrying out their humanitarian and professional duties."
"Dr. Abu Safiya remains held in solitary confinement at Nafha Prison under harsh and degrading detention conditions, while being denied necessary medical treatment and the most basic fundamental rights guaranteed to prisoners and detainees," the center continued, adding that it "holds the Israeli occupation authorities fully responsible for the life and safety of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, and calls for his immediate release, the provision of urgent medical care, and an end to the policy of arbitrary detention against medical and humanitarian personnel."
United Nations experts in March cited "reports that Dr. Abu Safiya has been subjected to torture and other cruel and degrading treatment, and that his health condition remains dire," as well as "flagrantly arbitrary" detention, in calling for his release. UN agencies, human rights groups, elected officials, and professional groups including the American Academy of Pediatrics are among those demanding that Israel free Abu Safiya.
Last week, Abu Safiya—who showed visible signs of his alleged torture—appeared remotely via video before the Supreme Court to demand his release following at least four major detention extensions or renewals.
“My detention is unjust and arbitrary, and I demand my immediate release,” he told the court. “I am a pediatrician who provides medical services and care to patients, the wounded and vulnerable people in the Gaza Strip.”
Abu Safiya was abducted while defying an Israeli forced displacement order by refusing to evacuate Kamal Adwan Hospital as long as patients were still being treated. In one of several Israel Defense Forces attacks on the facility, Israeli troops surrounded, bombarded, and then stormed the hospital over three weeks in December 2024, killing and wounding staff and patients while terrified children and other people were being treated inside.
During a previous Israeli attack on Kamal Adwan, Abu Safiya’s 15-year-old son was killed in a drone strike, and the doctor was seriously wounded in a separate drone attack that left six pieces of shrapnel in his leg.
As the invaders expelled Kamal Adwan's patients and staff, Abu Safiya sounded the alarm on the "catastrophic" conditions inside the facility, which, according to alleged victims and witnesses, included Israelis sexually assaulting women and girls as young as 13.
After his capture, Abu Safiya was first jailed at the notorious Sde Teiman prison in Israel’s Negev Desert—where dozens of detainees have died and where torture, sexual assault, and other abuses have been reported—and then Ofer Prison in the illegally occupied West Bank. He was subsequently transferred to Ketziot Prison and then Nafha Prison in the Ramon Prison complex.
Abu Safiya said he has endured torture by his captors—including beatings with batons and electric shocks—and suffered severe weight loss, broken ribs, and other injuries, for which he was allegedly denied adequate medical care.
Israeli authorities deny these accusations. However, there have been many documented and otherwise credible reports of health and medical workers being tortured by Israeli forces—sometimes fatally, as in the case of Dr. Adnan al-Bursh, who headed the orthopedic department at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.
According to Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, al-Bursh was “likely raped to death."
Responding to the Israeli Supreme Court's decision, former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis—an outspoken advocate for Palestinian rights—said Tuesday on social media that "the heroic doctor's torture by Israel continues."
"They continue to torture Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya for the crime of not abandoning his patients," he added. "Without laying charges [or] offering him anything resembling due process, Israel is killing him slowly. One day, everyone will say they were against this."
On Monday, the editors of Haaretz, Israel's oldest daily newspaper, asserted in an editorial that Abu Safiya's "continued detention, and that of the other doctors from Gaza, is an injustice and constitutes collective punishment for Gaza's residents, who need their service" amid an ongoing public health crisis.
"If Israel has evidence against Abu Safiya, it should indict him and present that evidence," the editors argued. "If it doesn't have evidence against him, it needs to release him, and all the other jailed doctors, promptly."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Netanyahu Refuses to Leave Lebanon, Iran Says Continued Israeli Occupation Would Violate Peace Deal
Trump now faces a choice: Ending the war or giving Israel what it wants.
Jun 16, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing a choice: Ending the war with Iran, which is tanking his popularity and the economy, or continuing his deference to Israel.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made it clear on Tuesday that he cannot have both.
Following assertions from Israeli leaders that it would not end its occupation of Lebanon, Araghchi reiterated that the memorandum of understanding signed virtually by the US and Iran required in no uncertain terms that "war will be ending everywhere, on all fronts, including Lebanon."
"Due to the relations between war in Lebanon and the aggression of Israel on south Lebanon and the war on Iran, these two fronts—Iran and Lebanon—are quite connected to each other," he said.
“End of the war will be the end of the occupation,” he continued. “And without retreating and withdrawing from the Lebanese occupied territories, then there will not be an end to the war.”
"So any military attack from the Zionist entity against Lebanon will never be accepted," he said. "The continuation of the Israeli occupation of the Lebanese territories is a violation of the memorandum of understanding."
It was a shot across the bow from Tehran following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion the day before that Israeli forces would remain in Lebanon "for as long as necessary” regardless of any US-Iran agreement.
“We established deep security zones around the state of Israel," he said, referring to the roughly 230 square mile occupation area where Israel has forcibly expelled more than 1 million Lebanese civilians and systematically demolished dozens of villages. "I want to make it clear: We will remain in these security zones… to protect our country.”
Other ministers were even blunter. Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said flatly that “Trump’s agreement does not bind us. Israel is not subordinate to the United States. We are an independent and sovereign country.”
Defense Minister Israel Katz said the occupation would go on “without any time limit" while villages would continue to be “cleared of local residents.” He said there would be no withdrawal "despite all the existing pressures" from the US, adding that, "we are committed only to our citizens and to the security of the state of Israel."
Trump has regularly deferred to Israel's preferences and sided with Netanyahu as he's derailed previous ceasefire talks. But during a news conference at the Group of Seven summit in France on Tuesday, Trump took a noticeably different tone with his obstinate ally.
Trump: "Without me, there would be no Israel ... I've had a great relationship with Bibi, but now Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon ... I'm not happy with the way Israel has handled themselves with Lebanon and Hezbollah." pic.twitter.com/xvLlEhYqWj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 16, 2026
Trump criticizes Netanyahu and Israel: "Israel has been fighting Hezbollah too long and too many people are being killed. You don't need to knock down an apartment every time you're looking for somebody. I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hezbollah, because too be… pic.twitter.com/NAmqoNkhpj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 16, 2026
The president said he "didn't like" the attack Netanyahu launched against the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sunday, where Israeli forces bombed a five-story apartment building, killing three people. "I saw that attack. I saw where that bomb went," he said, describing the attack as "vicious" and "too much."
"You don't need to knock down an apartment every time you're looking for somebody," he said, making perhaps his most forceful criticism ever of Israel's rampant attacks on civilian infrastructure. He continued that "if Israel can't do the job without killing everyone else, Syria should do the job" of fighting Hezbollah.
"Without the United States, there would be no Israel," he went on. "Without me, there would be no Israel, because no other president was willing to do what I did."
Referring to Netanyahu, he said, "I've had a great relationship with Bibi, but now Bibi has to be more responsible with respect to Lebanon," adding that the ongoing invasion "throws a negative light on the big deal, and that's the deal with Iran."
Commentators noted this is hardly the first time a US president has vented their anger with Netanyahu, only for nothing to materially change.
Noting Trump's previous description of Netanyahu as a "very difficult guy" after he attempted to blow up ceasefire talks on Sunday, Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, said, "The question is: why does Trump facilitate this obstruction by continuing to provide Israel with arms and military aid?"
Zeteo News editor Mehdi Hasan said: “Such is the madly erratic nature of Trump, that he can go from sounding like the most hawkish, pro-Israel president one day, to the most dovish, anti-Israel president the next day. Which is why listening to Trump is pointless; what matters is paying attention to what he does.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Travesty of Justice': UK Appeals Court Slammed for Upholding Ban on Palestine Action
"Classifying protest through direct action as terrorism brings Parliament and our judicial system into disrepute," said one Labour MP.
Jun 15, 2026
A UK appeals court is being accused of flouting the law to allow the government to suppress free speech after it upheld a ban on the direct action group Palestine Action.
Just days after four young activists with the group were hit with unprecedented “terrorism” sentences over their 2024 vandalism of an Israeli-owned weapons facility that was being used to supply the genocidal assault on Gaza, the Court of Appeal in London on Monday upheld the Labour government’s proscription of Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act of 2000.
The ban was approved in Parliament in July 2025 and outlawed expressions of support for the group. According to Amnesty International, more than 3,300 people have been arrested across Britain since last July "simply for their engagement in acts of peaceful protest opposing the proscription"—including more than 2,000 who have been arrested simply for holding signs that read "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.”
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London, where the decision was handed down, hundreds more Britons rallied in opposition.
“We acknowledge the Court of Appeal’s judgment that the home secretary’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action was lawful,” the Metropolitan Police said in a statement shortly after. “This means that expressing support for the organization remains a criminal offense, and officers will arrest those who break the law.”
“Officers are policing a protest outside the Royal Courts of Justice today where a number of people are displaying placards in support of Palestine Action," it continued. "Arrests are underway.”
Protesters were carried away, while onlookers shouted, “Shame” and “You’re complicit” at officers.
Arrests continue outside the Royal Courts of Justice after Court of Appeal find proscription of Palestine Action to be lawful.
We will continue to protest this Government’s embarrassing attempts to cover up its crimes with intimidation tactics.
Join us: https://t.co/XhFvPsZC3U pic.twitter.com/9okcFkVVtf
— Defend Our Juries (@DefendOurJuries) June 15, 2026
As The New York Times pointed out:
Palestine Action, which no longer exists in its original form, did not promote violence against individuals. But its members damaged sites linked to Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer, and last June broke into [Royal Air Force] Brize Norton, Britain’s largest air force base, in Oxfordshire, vandalizing two aircraft.
The activists who were given hefty sentences on Friday have argued that “innocent lives were saved” by their destruction of military equipment in the Elbit facility. Drones manufactured by the company have been documented in use during attacks on civilians, including the April 2024 strike on a World Central Kitchen convoy that killed seven aid workers.
But although members of the group have never been accused of any premeditated act of violence against other human beings, the British government’s terror designation puts it on the same level, legally speaking, as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or the neo-Nazi Atomwaffen Division, and expressions of support can carry maximum sentences of 14 years in prison.
In February, the High Court sided with Palestine Action, ruling that the ban on support breached the rights to free expression and assembly under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
However, a five-judge appeals court panel overruled this decision on Monday, with Chief Justice Sue Carr writing that while the ban was “highly controversial,” and that the group “was supported by many otherwise law-abiding citizens,” it was a “fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promoted unlawful violence amounting to terrorism.”
Pointing to its sabotage of Elbit, she said the group's actions were “intended to close down lawful businesses” and said that "future threats and risks posed to third-party individuals and property by Palestine Action were perhaps the most important factors to weigh in the balance.”
Carr said that the ban would "not prevent public expressions of support for the Palestinian cause or opposition to Israel and to the Israel Defense Forces, or demonstrations targeted at Elbit."
But in the process, even she acknowledged that such a severe restriction on peaceful assembly in support of Palestine Action could indeed have a "chilling effect" on otherwise law-abiding citizens and cause them to be "deterred from assembling lawfully or making their strongly held anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian views public for fear of their actions being construed as support for Palestine Action."
Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, who challenged the ban in court, said her group would "fight this all the way" and planned to appeal to the UK Supreme Court and potentially even the European Court of Human Rights.
"We will not stop fighting to overturn one of the most extreme attacks on free speech and the right to protest in modern British history," she said. "This unprecedented abuse of power has devastated the lives of thousands of people while silencing dissent over Israel’s slaughter of the Palestinian people during the genocide, when that dissent could not be more urgent.”
Today's ruling by the Court of Appeal is deeply disappointing.
This case remains about much more than one group.
What’s important for all of us to understand is that proscription is one of the strongest powers the government has.
Treating protest as terrorism leaves the… pic.twitter.com/WI3O05LYEn
— Amnesty UK (@AmnestyUK) June 15, 2026
The ruling was met with outrage from supporters of Palestinian rights and human rights groups.
Ammar Kazmi, the senior legal coordinator for the Derby-based Left Legal Fighting Fund, said that with this ruling, the judges allowed the political objective of criminalizing pro-Palestine speech to take precedence over the law.
"The judges allowed policy reasons to override strictly legal arguments, and they showed deference to ‘national security’ questions," he wrote on social media. "They also said that proscription is a ‘proportionate’ interference with free speech rights. In other words, they allowed the government to ride roughshod over the law."
Amnesty UK called the ruling "deeply disappointing," adding that the case "remains about much more than one group."
"What’s important for all of us to understand is that proscribing a group as a terrorist organization is one of the strongest powers the government has," the human rights group said. "The banning of Palestine Action as a terrorist organization is a grave misuse of counterterrorism powers with serious consequences for human rights."
Former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn—whose successor, Prime Minister Keir Starmer—enacted the ban, said, "Today’s ruling to uphold the UK government's proscription of Palestine Action is a travesty of justice."
"One by one, the very foundations of our democracy are being destroyed—all to oil the wheels of British complicity in genocide," said Corbyn, who is leading an unofficial "tribunal" that presented evidence of UK participation in Israel's assault on Gaza to the International Criminal Court in March.
Noting the large number of pensioners who have been hauled off by police for holding protest signs opposing the ban—including dozens arrested on Friday for opposing the sentencing of those involved in the Elbit raid—Labour MP John McDonnell said, "Parliament should reverse the decision to proscribe Palestine Action urgently before we see large numbers of elderly people in particular being dragged before our courts."
He added that "classifying protest through direct action as terrorism brings Parliament and our judicial system into disrepute."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular