Me: Did Israel arrested thousands of Palestinians illegally during the war, with no charges?
Chatgpt: Yes — credible human rights organisations, UN bodies, and Palestinian groups have documented that Israel has detained thousands of Palestinians without formal charges or trial, using legal mechanisms such as “administrative detention” and the “unlawful combatants law.” Whether all of these detentions are “illegal” depends on legal interpretations, but many international actors view many of those detentions as violating due process and international human rights law. Below is a summary of what is known, points of debate, and the sources.
What Is Known
-
Numbers of detainees without trial/charge
-
As of mid-2025, Israel holds over 10,000 Palestinians in its prisons/detention centres, many of whom are held without trial or formal charge. (Anadolu Ajansı)
-
Of those, around 3,300-3,600 are held under “administrative detention,” meaning detention without charge or trial. (Anadolu Ajansı)
-
Additionally, thousands are held under the “unlawful combatants law,” a designation that allows detention in a more opaque legal framework. (Anadolu Ajansı)
-
-
Legal mechanisms used
-
Administrative detention: a military order allowing detention without trial or charge, often for periods (e.g. 6 months) that may be renewed multiple times, sometimes indefinitely. Evidence may be secret, and detainees may have limited access to it or to legal representation. (Anadolu Ajansı)
-
Unlawful combatants law: applied particularly to people from Gaza; this law allows detaining individuals without normal criminal court proceedings, often for security reasons. (Amnesty International)
-
-
Criticism by international and human rights groups
-
Groups like Amnesty International argue that many of these detentions constitute arbitrary detention in violation of international law. They call for detainees held without charge or trial to be released, or at least given full due process. (Amnesty International)
-
Human rights organisations raise concerns about due process deficits: secret evidence, lack of access to counsel, long renewals of detention without judicial oversight. (Middle East Monitor)
-
Areas of Dispute / Legal & Contextual Qualifications
-
Legal basis under Israeli law: Israel argues these practices are legal under its own laws (military law, administrative detention legislation) and are necessary for security in the context of ongoing conflict.
-
“Without charge” vs “without trial”: Some detentions are without formal charges; others are awaiting trial (“pre-trial detention”). The precise legal status of each detainee may vary.
-
Secret evidence and due process: Because much of the evidence in administrative detention is classified, detainees often do not know the full case against them. Critics argue this violates rights under both Israeli law and international human rights treaties.
-
International law perspective: Under international human rights law (e.g. ICCPR, conventions on treatment of detainees), detaining people without charge or trial for long periods, without adequate judicial oversight, is often impermissible or at least requires strict justification, transparency and safeguards.
Conclusion
So, in short: yes, there is strong evidence that thousands of Palestinians have been detained by Israeli authorities without trial or formal charge, particularly since the beginning of the Gaza conflict in October 2023. Whether every such detention is “illegal” in a strict legal sense can depend on definitions and the particular circumstances (e.g. how long detention lasts, whether there is judicial review, whether detainees have access to legal counsel). But many of these detentions are judged by human rights groups and international bodies to violate due process rights, and thus to be unlawful or deeply problematic.
If you like, I can pull up specific cases as examples, or show what international law says about these kinds of detentions. Do you want me to do that?
“Security” is the universal justification used by regimes when they suppress rights. North Korea, the CCP, the Islamic Republic, and Israel’s occupation authority all claim extraordinary measures are required to “protect the nation.” In every case, the result is the same pattern: mass detention, censorship, denial of due process, and criminalization of dissent.
When a government’s claim of security depends on suspending the rights of an entire population — movement, speech, trial, and representation — it is no longer defending security; it is enforcing control. The structural test is simple:
-
If security requires eliminating rights, the system itself has become the threat.
-
If rights can exist universally within it, the system is coherent.
So yes, Israel’s claim mirrors the logic of authoritarian regimes. Security without rights is not protection; it is containment.
Me: Would you say these arresting are illegal?
Chatgpt: Structurally — yes.
Under international law and the universal principles of due process, detaining people without charge, trial, or access to evidence is illegal. It violates multiple binding standards:
-
Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) — prohibits arbitrary arrest or detention.
-
Fourth Geneva Convention (Articles 71–78) — allows limited wartime detention but only with judicial oversight, notification of charges, and access to legal counsel.
-
Customary international law — upholds the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial.
Israel’s use of administrative detention and the “unlawful combatants” designation bypasses these guarantees. When thousands are held on secret evidence, indefinitely, with no charges or meaningful review, those detentions meet the definition of arbitrary and unlawful imprisonment under international law.
Domestic legality under Israeli military orders does not override this — no internal law can legalize what is internationally illegal.
So: while Israel calls these detentions lawful for “security reasons,” the structural and legal reality is clear — mass detention without due process is illegal.