The judgment, issued on Wednesday, removes a policy that had barred ICRC access to Palestinian detainees for more than two years. The restriction was introduced after Israel accused the humanitarian organization of failing to secure access to hostages held in Gaza by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups following the attack.

The court found that the government had not adequately justified maintaining a blanket prohibition on prison visits, opening the way for the potential resumption of ICRC monitoring activities inside Israeli detention facilities.

The ICRC welcomed the ruling and said it was prepared to restart visits immediately. In a statement issued Wednesday evening, the organization said it was continuing discussions with Israeli authorities to resume detention-related operations as soon as possible.

The agency reiterated that access to detainees, including the ability to conduct private interviews, is an obligation under international humanitarian law.
Israel suspended ICRC visits to security-related prisoners shortly after the October 2023 attack, arguing that the organization had been unable to gain access to Israeli hostages held in Gaza.

The restrictions remained in force even after the return of the last hostages in October 2025.
The ruling comes amid sustained scrutiny of detention conditions in Israeli prisons. Human rights organizations, including several Israeli groups, have reported worsening conditions for Palestinian detainees, citing allegations of mistreatment, inadequate medical care and violence inside detention facilities.

The Prisoners Club, a leading Palestinian prisoners’ rights organization, said the court’s decision would have limited practical impact unless visits resume promptly. The group’s head, Abdullah Al-Zaghari, argued that the judgment should not obscure broader concerns regarding the role of Israeli judicial institutions in policies affecting Palestinian detainees.

The decision marks a significant legal setback for the government’s detention policy and could increase pressure on authorities to restore independent humanitarian monitoring of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli custody.

The bill passed the 120-seat Knesset by a vote of 93-0, with remaining lawmakers absent or abstaining, reflecting broad political backing for prosecuting suspects linked to the deadliest attack in Israel’s history.

The legislation creates a separate judicial framework to try individuals accused of involvement in the assault led by Hamas militants, who killed about 1,200 people and took 251 hostages during the cross-border attack in October 2023.

Under the new law, judges will be allowed to impose capital punishment through a majority decision rather than requiring unanimity. Appeals against verdicts or sentences will be heard by a dedicated appeals court rather than Israel’s regular judicial system.

The trials are also expected to be livestreamed from a courtroom in Jerusalem, prompting comparisons by critics to the televised 1962 trial of Nazi official Adolf Eichmann, whose execution remains the only civilian use of the death penalty in Israel’s history.

Israeli and international rights organizations criticized the measure, arguing that it weakens fair trial protections and risks politicizing judicial proceedings.
Groups including Adalah, Hamoked and the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel said accountability for the Oct. 7 attack should not come at the expense of established legal standards.

Critics also raised concerns over the admissibility and reliability of evidence potentially obtained through coercive interrogation methods, as well as the impact of broadcasting proceedings before convictions are secured.

The legislation is separate from another law passed earlier this year authorizing the death penalty for Palestinians convicted of killing Israelis. That measure applies only to future cases and does not cover suspects detained over the 2023 attack.

According to Israeli rights organizations, about 1,300 Palestinians from Gaza Strip remain in Israeli detention without formal charges, while thousands more have been detained and later released since the start of the war.

Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, launched in response to the Oct. 7 assault, has killed more than 72,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. The ministry does not distinguish between civilians and combatants, though United Nations agencies and international observers have generally considered its casualty reporting credible.

Simcha Rothman, a sponsor of the bill and member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition, said the legislation demonstrated national unity around securing accountability for the attacks.

Spanish national Saif Abu Keshek and Brazilian national Thiago Avila appeared before a court in Ashkelon for a second hearing, after being brought to Israel last week following the interception of their vessel by Israeli forces off the coast of Greece.“The court approved their detention until Sunday morning,” said Miriam Azem of Adalah, which is providing legal representation.

An AFP journalist witnessed the activists being escorted into the courtroom with their legs shackled.The two were among dozens of individuals aboard a flotilla that had set sail from France, Spain and Italy with the stated aim of delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza and challenging Israel’s long-standing blockade.

Adalah said the activists have been on a hunger strike for six days and alleged that both were subjected to physical and psychological abuse in detention. The group said they were being held in isolation under constant high-intensity lighting, with Avila allegedly exposed to extremely cold temperatures.“They are kept blindfolded at all times whenever they are moved outside their cells, including during medical examinations,” the group said.

Israeli authorities have rejected the allegations.During an earlier hearing, prosecutors presented a list of charges including assisting the enemy during wartime and membership in, and providing services to, a terrorist organization, according to Adalah.

Defense lawyers challenged Israel’s jurisdiction, arguing the activists had been unlawfully detained in international waters.Israel’s foreign ministry said both individuals were affiliated with the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad, which it alleged has links to Hamas. It described Abu Keshek as a leading member and said Avila was also suspected of involvement in illegal activity.

The flotilla was part of the Global Sumud initiative, whose previous attempt last year was similarly intercepted. Israeli forces stopped the latest convoy early on Thursday off Greece’s coast.Israel has maintained a blockade on Gaza since 2007 and controls access points into the territory.

Aid flows have been severely disrupted during the ongoing war that began in October 2023, contributing to shortages of essential supplies.

While the institution maintains Islamic character, it is deeply embedded within the Israeli state system.

In the heart of Israel’s diverse legal system lies a remarkable institution: the Shariah courts. Far from being relics of history, these courts remain active and relevant today, quietly handling personal matters for the country’s 1.7 million Muslim citizens. They represent not only legal pluralism, but also the careful balancing act between faith, law, and national identity in a complex society.

Ottoman Roots in a Modern Nation

Shariah courts in Israel trace their origins back to the Ottoman Empire, when Islamic law governed personal status matters for Muslims in the region. The British Mandate preserved the system, and rather than dismantling it after the formation of the State of Israel in 1948, the new government incorporated it into its judiciary. Today, these courts are fully recognized under Israeli law and function under the Ministry of Justice.

There are currently nine regional Shariah courts across the country, with a Supreme Shariah Court headquartered in Jerusalem. These courts have jurisdiction over personal status issues such as marriage, divorce, child custody, alimony, inheritance, and burial for Muslim citizens.

Functioning Inside the Israeli Legal Framework

Muslim citizens of Israel can voluntarily use the Shariah courts to resolve family matters in line with Islamic tradition. Qadis (judges) appointed to these courts must be trained in both Shariah and Israeli civil law. Their rulings are legally binding and enforceable like any other court decision in the country.

While the institution maintains Islamic character, it is deeply embedded within the Israeli state system. This integration creates a unique dynamic — one which is both accepted and questioned by segments of the Arab Muslim community and Israeli society at large.

Influencer Shareef Safadi Sheds Light on Tel Aviv’s Shariah Court

Popular Arab-Israeli influencer Shareef Safadi, known for his educational and cultural commentary, brought the Shariah court in Tel Aviv into public focus through a now-viral video filmed in Jaffa. His commentary offers both humor and insight into how these courts operate in contemporary Israel.

“Today we are in the Sharia court in Tel Aviv,” he begins. “Yes, a Sharia court in Tel Aviv — or more specifically in Jaffa.”

Safadi explains the court’s primary role, “Now the Sharia court deals mainly with Islamic civil matters such as marriages, divorces, inheritance, and so on and so on.”

He adds a historical twist, pointing to the building’s past, “This house belonged to a Palestinian Christian family who fled during the war of 1948 during the Nakba. It was later used by the Israeli military, and then it was abandoned — and then after that, it became the Sharia court.”

In a reflective tone, he touches on symbolism and political nuance, “This court is part of the Israeli judicial system and therefore it has to have an Israeli flag. But when Arabs have to put the Israeli flag in governmental institutions, they fold it so the flag isn’t shown that much — as you can see in this court.”

Safadi’s video, layered with subtle commentary and cultural sensitivity, underscores the balancing act Muslim institutions in Israel navigate — functioning under a Jewish state while retaining a distinct religious and communal identity.

A Landmark Moment: The First Female Judge

In a historic development, Hana Khatib became Israel’s first female judge in the Shariah court system in 2017 — a watershed moment in a traditionally male-dominated domain. Appointed after a rigorous process, Khatib, a lawyer and expert in family law, broke significant barriers and became a symbol of evolving gender dynamics within Islamic jurisprudence in Israel.

Her appointment was widely celebrated among Arab-Israeli civil society and cautiously welcomed by religious authorities. For many Muslim women, Khatib’s presence in the courtroom provided a sense of representation and greater confidence in seeking justice through the Shariah courts.

Between Tradition and Modernity

For Muslim communities across Israel — from Nazareth to Rahat — the Shariah courts remain a vital thread in preserving religious identity within a modern, pluralistic state. Elders, imams, and family advocates continue to guide families in navigating these courts, ensuring that age-old traditions meet the demands of modern legal systems.

And while challenges persist — particularly around gender equity and modernization — the Shariah courts of Israel stand as a unique example in the region. They blend faith and law in a way that few other Middle Eastern states manage, allowing Muslims in Israel to live their personal lives in accordance with Islamic values — without stepping outside the bounds of the state.

In a nation often framed through the lens of conflict, the Shariah courts offer a quieter but profound story: of adaptation, coexistence, and continuity.