Skip Navigation


Journal of International Criminal Justice Advance Access originally published online on March 3, 2009
Journal of International Criminal Justice 2009 7(1):155-175; doi:10.1093/jicj/mqp012
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
7/1/155    most recent
mqp012v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ben-Naftali, O.
Right arrow Articles by Zamir, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press, 2009, All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Whose ‘Conduct Unbecoming’?

The Shooting of a Handcuffed, Blindfolded Palestinian Demonstrator

Orna Ben-Naftali* and Noam Zamir**

*Professor Orna Ben-Naftali is the Dean of the Law School, The College of Management Academic Studies, Israel. She is also a member of the executive board of B’tselem, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. [obennaft{at}colman.ac.il]
**Noam Zamir is a research fellow at the Concord Center for the Integration of International Law into Israeli Law, the Law School, The College of Management Academic Studies, Israel. [sonicnoam{at}gmail.com]


   Abstract

The article focuses on the decision of the Israeli Military Advocate General (MAG) to charge an officer who ordered the shooting of a handcuffed, blindfolded Palestinian demonstrator, and the soldier who executed the order, for ‘conduct unbecoming’. It advances the following propositions: (i) from the perspective of the applicable international law, the facts of the case qualify the shooting as a war crime; (ii) said decision of the Israeli MAG is indicative of a policy of tolerance towards violence against non-violent civilian protest against the construction of the Separation Wall; (iii) the implication of such policy is twofold: first, it might transform ‘conduct unbecoming’ — which as a matter of law is a war crime — into a crime against humanity; second, it may well be construed as an invitation to the international community to intervene through the exercise of universal jurisdiction.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.