| ID | 080322 |
| Title Proper | Security and human rights policy |
| Other Title Information | Israel and the interrogation case of 1999 |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Meydani, Assaf |
| Publication | 2007. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | When are interrogators exempt from criminal responsibility by the imperative to
acquire information that might save lives endangered by terrorist attack? This
article uses the Israeli example to show that aspects of security policy previously
assumed to be based on independent foundations actually results from political bargaining.
Interrogation of terrorist suspects is governed instead by bargaining
between political leaders, civil servants and interest groups, all of whom function
in an environment conditioned by non-governability, judicialization, and an alternative
political culture.
This article examines tensions between human rights and domestic security
through a detailed analysis of the dispute over interrogation methods by the Israeli
General Security Service (Shin Beth), which resulted in the Israeli High Court of Justice's
Interrogation Decision of 1999. While most studies deal with security culture as
a belief that determines polices, this article elaborates on the input of various political
actors who operate within a complex of variables. The article examines the alternative
culture in Israel that has a powerful effect on the creation of public security
policy. The gridlock created by competing governmental institutions has prompted
judicial intervention in many areas. Faced with a paralysed government, interest
groups have created an alternative political culture, stressing action through the
courts. Accelerated judicial activism has the effect of diminishing respect for the
law in the eyes of the public. |
| `In' analytical Note | Contemporary Security Policy Vol. 28, No.3; Dec 2007: p579-596 |
| Journal Source | Contemporary Security Policy Vol. 28, No.3; Dec 2007: p579-596 |
| Key Words | Human Rights ; Human Security |