## Facts

- Adolf Eichmann, a former SS officer responsible for Jewish affairs and implementing the “Final Solution,” lived in Argentina under an assumed identity after World War II.
- In 1960, Israeli agents seized Eichmann in Argentina and brought him to Israel; Argentina protested internationally, and the States later reached a diplomatic settlement.
- Eichmann was indicted in Israel under the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710-1950, on multiple counts including crimes against the Jewish people, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and membership in hostile organizations.
- The District Court of Jerusalem tried Eichmann in 1961, rejected jurisdictional and other preliminary objections, convicted him on the major counts, and imposed the death penalty.
- Eichmann appealed to Israel’s Supreme Court, challenging jurisdiction, the effect of his abduction, retroactive application of the 1950 law, and defenses based on superior orders and state authority.

## Issues

1. Whether Israel could exercise criminal jurisdiction over a non-national for Holocaust-era crimes committed outside Israel and before Israel’s establishment.
2. Whether Eichmann’s forcible seizure in Argentina and transfer to Israel required dismissal or divested the Israeli courts of jurisdiction.
3. Whether applying the 1950 statute to conduct from 1941–1945 violated the principle of legality (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege).
4. Whether superior orders or “act of state” doctrines barred individual criminal liability for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes against the Jewish people.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Israel dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and death sentence.
- The Court held Israel could prosecute because the charged offenses were crimes under international law of universal concern, and Israel also had a specific protective interest tied to the attempted extermination of the Jewish people.
- The Court held the manner of Eichmann’s capture did not bar the proceedings; any breach of sovereignty created an inter-state dispute resolvable by the injured State, not a personal defense for the accused.
- The Court held the prosecution did not violate legality principles because the conduct was already criminal under the law of nations when committed; the 1950 statute supplied domestic enforcement for pre-existing international norms.
- The Court rejected superior-orders and state-authority defenses, holding that obedience to manifestly unlawful orders does not exonerate participation in international crimes, particularly for a senior implementer.

## Legal Principles

- Certain international crimes (including war crimes and crimes against humanity) permit universal jurisdiction, allowing domestic courts to prosecute absent an international tribunal.
- A State may also assert protective jurisdiction where acts target the State’s vital interests, including where crimes are directed at the people whose collective existence the State represents.
- An accused generally cannot invoke an inter-state violation of sovereignty arising from irregular rendition as a basis to defeat personal criminal jurisdiction when the injured State has settled or waived its claim.
- Retrospective domestic legislation may be permissible where it enforces conduct already criminal under customary international law at the time of commission, rather than creating new offenses.
- Superior orders and “act of state” doctrines do not provide a defense to liability for international crimes; at most, obedience may bear on mitigation where the legal system allows.

## Conclusion

Israel’s Supreme Court upheld Eichmann’s conviction and sentence by grounding jurisdiction in the universal character of Holocaust crimes and Israel’s protective interest, while holding that illegal capture did not vitiate jurisdiction, that legality was satisfied because the acts were already prohibited by international law, and that superior-orders and state-authority defenses could not shield individual responsibility for international crimes.


Attorney-General of the Gov't of Isr. v. Eichmann, CrimA 336/61 (Isr. 1962)