High Court: Lebanon War probe need not single out officials - Haaretz

Subscribe to Print Edition

Tue., November 27, 2007 Kislev 17, 5768

Israel Time: 14:26 (EST+7)

web haaretz.com

Back to Homepage

Rosner's Domain

Diplomacy

Defense

Jewish World

Opinion

National

Print Edition

Advertising

Books

Arts & Leisure

Business

Real Estate

Easy Start

Travel

Week's End

Anglo File



		High Court justices conducting a hearing earlier this month on the Winograd war probe report. (Tess Scheflan / Jini)

del.icio.us

Digg It! new

Last update - 12:29 27/11/2007

High Court: Lebanon War probe need not single out officials

By Yuval Yoaz, Haaretz Correspondent

Tags: Second Lebanon War, Olmert

The High Court of Justice, rejecting petitions by the chief military prosecutor and the Movement for Quality Government, ruled on Tuesday that the Winograd Commission, the central inquiry panel probing government failures during the Second Lebanon War, need not single out individual officials for criticism or recommended punishment.

A number of senior government officials could have been harmed by personal findings, in particular Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and wartime defense minister Amir Peretz.

But Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch voiced thinly veiled criticism of the commission's change of heart regarding recommendations regarding individual responsibility for mishandling of duties prior to and during the war.

	Advertisement

Some three months ago the committee promised the High Court to send warning letters to any individuals who might be harmed by findings, conclusions or recommendations in the final report. Later, the chairman of the committee, retired judge Eliyahu Winograd, announced that the committee had decided to accelerate its work and to publish the final report before the end of 2007, a decision that would have consequences for the report's contents.

The probe committee informed the High Court earlier this month that its final report will not contain findings, conclusions or recommendations about individuals, obviating the need for sending out warning letters to individuals who might be harmed by its contents. "The committee members reached the conclusion," the Winograd Committee said in its letter to the court, "that the most appropriate route is not to include personal matters in the final report."

The commission said its conclusions would be on the level of "systems," or governmental bodies as a whole, and not on the level of individuals.

The justices ruled Tuesday that the commission also need not send out letters warning individuals that they may be singled out for criticism in the report, nor grant hearings to individuals who might stand to be harmed by the commission's report.

However, in the Tuesday court session, Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch and justices Edna Arbel and Hanan Meltzer commented on the commission's about-face, saying the "gap" between the initial intention and the later announcement "raises questions."

Citing the Winograd Commission's preliminary report, Beinisch wrote that the inquiry panel viewed as its central mission the determination of findings and the drawing of conclusions. She added that it would be wrong to refrain from making findings, rendering conclusions and singling out individuals for criticism.

Therefore, Beinisch wrote, "The commission's declaration that it does not intend to include personal recommendations in its final report is curious. It is unclear how the commission has now come to the sweeping decision to refrain from recommendations and conclusions.

She also voiced indirect criticism of the commission's contention that, due to the report's concentration on government bodies as a whole and not individual officials, there is no need to grant hearings to individuals who stand to be harmed by the report.

According to Beinisch, the latter argument is "not free of difficulties. The line between system-level conclusions and personal conclusions is not clear, and in the present circumstances, the disclosure of failures on the level of a system may yield conclusions that encompass [the possibility of] harm to individuals."

Related articles:

Military Advocate General asks court to freeze war probe report

Lebanon war probe accuses Olmert of 'severe failure,' blasts Halutz, Peretz

Winograd to court: War report won't include personal findings

Winograd Committee to publish final war report by end of year

Bookmark to del.icio.us


	The IDF's dilemna
	To what extent should the IDF subdue its West Bank and Gaza actions in coming days?


	Not one inch
	Hamas says they will reject any deals made by Abbas in Annapolis.




1.	With an apology to T.S. Elliot	13:40	\|	Mark Lincoln	27/11/07

Today Online


	Bradley Burston: People who hate the very idea of peace
	Responses: 44


	Yoel Marcus: George W. Bush, groupie of Israel
	Responses: 17


	Avi Issacharoff: PA has learned to lower expectations
	Responses: 13


	Bush to call for peace on the basis of two nation states
	Responses: 50


	Jewish, Christian leaders to U.S.: No compromise on J'lem
	Responses: 116

Rosner's Domain

You were expecting a weekend in Riyadh?

The Rosner Annapolis reader

Rosner's Guest: Good reasons for Israel to explore Syria negotiations

Bush doctrine, the end? (WTR)

More Headlines
14:25 Saudi FM: U.S. vowed one-year deadline for Mideast peace talks


14:26 PA police breaks up Ramallah rally, 1000s of Gazans protest summit


13:51 IDF troops kill four Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip


14:23 Iran: We've developed new missile with range of 2,000 km


11:42 Protesters disrupt Oxford debate with Holocaust denier


13:39 Ex-Israeli U.S. professor confesses to killing wife


13:20 Beinisch: Israel is swarming with harrowing violence


11:17 PM: Arabs should open consular offices in Israel following summit


12:29 High Court: Lebanon War probe need not single out officials