TEL AVIV, Sept. 7, 2025 — Israel’s Supreme Court ruled Sunday that the government has failed to provide Palestinian security prisoners with adequate food and ordered prison authorities to improve their nutrition to meet a legal standard of basic subsistence.
A three-judge panel said the state is legally obligated to ensure prisoners receive sufficient food and found “indications that the current food supply to prisoners does not sufficiently guarantee compliance with the legal standard.” The decision followed a petition by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) and the rights group Gisha challenging a postwar change in prison food policy.
The court ordered the Israel Prison Service to take steps to ensure the supply of food that allows for “basic subsistence conditions in accordance with the law.” The ruling came in one of the rare instances during the nearly two-year-old Gaza war in which the country’s highest court has ruled against government policy tied to security operations.
Since the war began, Israeli authorities have detained thousands of people from Gaza on suspicion of ties to Hamas; thousands more have been released without charge after months in custody. Rights organizations have reported widespread abuse in detention facilities, including insufficient food and health care, poor sanitary conditions and beatings. In March, a 17-year-old Palestinian detainee died in an Israeli prison; doctors said starvation was likely the main cause of death.
The petitioners argued that a change in food policy enacted after the start of the war led to malnutrition and, in some cases, conditions approaching starvation. The court said it had found “real doubts” that prisoners were eating properly and required the prison service to remedy the situation.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who oversees the prison system and leads a small far-right party, criticized the ruling. He said in comments following the decision that while Israeli hostages in Gaza had no one to help them, the Supreme Court “to our disgrace” was defending Hamas militants. Ben-Gvir added that the policy of providing prisoners with “the most minimal conditions stipulated by the law” would continue unchanged.
ACRI called on authorities to implement the decision immediately. In a post on X, the group said the prison service had “turned Israeli prisons into torture camps” and asserted, “A state does not starve people.” Gisha also urged swift compliance with the court’s orders.
Legal experts and human rights lawyers said the ruling underscores the judiciary’s continued role in reviewing the government’s conduct during wartime and enforcing basic legal protections for detainees. The court’s demand that the prison service ensure adequate nutrition does not address broader questions about detention policy, release procedures or the conditions of detention beyond food; those matters have been the subject of separate legal and political debate since the outbreak of hostilities.
The government and the Israel Prison Service did not immediately release a detailed plan for implementing the court’s directive. The ruling gives prison authorities a legal obligation to adjust food provisions to meet the court’s standard, but it leaves the specifics of dietary changes and monitoring to be carried out by the relevant agencies.
Human rights groups have repeatedly documented detention issues since the war began, and the court’s decision may increase pressure on Israel’s security and prison authorities to provide transparent reporting on detainees’ health and living conditions. The ruling could also prompt additional legal challenges if rights groups or lawyers believe implementation falls short.
The Supreme Court’s action follows months of international and domestic concern over treatment of detainees from Gaza. Israeli officials have defended security measures as necessary during the conflict, while rights groups argue that humanitarian and legal obligations apply regardless of the security context. The new order requires authorities to reconcile those security claims with the legal duty to prevent malnutrition and ensure basic subsistence for people in custody.