‘Israeli’ soldiers who sexually abused Palestinian detainees sue govt for $6 million

Three ‘Israeli’ soldiers from the military's Force 100 unit, previously accused in connection with the severe sexual abuse of a Palestinian detainee at the Sde Teiman military detention facility, have filed a civil lawsuit seeking 18 million shekels (about $6 million) from the ‘Israeli’ state and 17 other defendants.

The suit, submitted in late August 2026 to the Jerusalem District Court with assistance from the right-wing legal aid group Honenu, follows the military’s decision earlier this year to drop all criminal charges against the five reservists originally indicted, according to reports on Hebrew media.

The incident occurred on July 5, 2024.

According to the February 2025 indictment, the blindfolded and handcuffed detainee was subjected to about 15 minutes of violence that included kicking, stomping, clubbing, dragging along the ground, and repeated taser use, including to the head.

One soldier was accused of stabbing the man in the buttocks with a sharp object near the anus, causing a rectal tear.

The detainee suffered seven broken ribs, a punctured lung, and internal injuries requiring surgery and a temporary stoma.

Surveillance footage of parts of the episode was later leaked and broadcast by Channel 12 in August 2024, prompting domestic and international outcry; the UN human rights office described the images as “shocking.”

Five soldiers were eventually charged with aggravated abuse and causing serious bodily harm (initial media and investigative suspicions of sexual assault or rape were not reflected as formal sexual-offense counts in the final indictment).

The case became highly politicized, with protests including a break-in at the base by supporters of the soldiers.

In March 2026, Military Advocate General Brig. Gen. Itai Ofir withdrew the indictments, citing the complexity of the evidence, the detainee’s return to Gaza (which hindered testimony), procedural problems including the leak of investigative material, and concerns that the defendants’ right to a fair trial had been compromised.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu welcomed the move, stating that ‘Israel’ must “pursue its enemies, not its heroic fighters” and previously characterizing the affair as a “blood libel.”

Human rights groups strongly criticized the decision.

Sari Bashi of the Public Committee Against Torture in ‘Israel’ said it amounted to a “whitewash” that gave soldiers “a license to rape—so long as the victim is Palestinian.”
Amnesty International’s Erika Guevara Rosas called it “yet another unconscionable chapter in the Israeli legal system’s long-standing history of granting impunity to perpetrators of grave crimes against Palestinians.”

Former Military Advocate General Maj. Gen. Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, who oversaw the original proceedings, later resigned and faced investigation after admitting she authorized the video’s release “in an attempt to counter false propaganda against the army’s law enforcement authorities.”

Three of the soldiers are now seeking damages for what they describe as false suspicions of a serious sexual offense, 15 days of wrongful detention, defamation, a wrongful indictment, and the handling (or alleged cover-up) of the leak investigation.

Specific claimed amounts include 1.5 million shekels for the sexual-offense suspicion, 450,000 for detention, 3 million for defamation, 1 million for the indictment, and 500,000 related to the leak probe, among other categories.

Honenu attorney Menashe Yado, representing the plaintiffs, described the action as “a complex lawsuit against powerful figures, including the former command echelon of the military prosecution and Channel 12, the most powerful media organization in Israel,” whom he accused of joining together to harm the soldiers.

He argued that the case also concerns “the rule of law and the equality of the individual before the law-enforcement system.”

An earlier, smaller civil claim related to the media coverage had already been filed.

The defendants have not yet fully responded in the new proceedings, and the claims remain unadjudicated.