## Facts

- Adolf Eichmann, a senior SS officer, directed or coordinated Nazi policies aimed at the persecution and destruction of Jews in Europe.
- His responsibilities included organizing and supervising deportations to ghettos and extermination sites, operating deportation offices, and facilitating related administrative measures.
- In May 1960, Israeli agents seized Eichmann in Argentina and brought him to Israel.
- Eichmann was prosecuted under Israel’s Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710-1950 on counts including crimes against the Jewish people, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and membership in a criminal organization.
- The District Court of Jerusalem rejected challenges to jurisdiction and legality, convicted Eichmann on major counts, and imposed a death sentence.
- Eichmann appealed to the Supreme Court of Israel, contesting jurisdiction, the statute’s retroactive and extraterritorial reach, the effect of his abduction from Argentina, and his personal culpability based on obedience to orders.

## Issues

1. Whether Israel could exercise criminal jurisdiction over a non-national for acts committed outside Israel before Israel’s establishment against non-Israeli victims.
2. Whether the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law was invalid under international law because it applied retroactively and extraterritorially and authorized capital punishment.
3. Whether Eichmann’s forcible transfer from Argentina barred prosecution or deprived Israeli courts of jurisdiction.
4. Whether superior orders, claimed subordination, or “act of state” concepts negated or limited individual criminal responsibility for international crimes.
5. Whether the charged offenses were recognized as crimes under international law at the time of commission.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the convictions and death sentence.
- The Court held Israel had jurisdiction based on the universal character of the crimes and Israel’s protective interest as the state representing the Jewish people targeted for destruction.
- The Court upheld the statute as consistent with international law because it gave domestic effect and penalties to conduct already criminal under international law when committed.
- The Court ruled the manner of Eichmann’s capture did not defeat jurisdiction; any wrong implicated state-to-state relations rather than a personal defense.
- The Court rejected superior-orders and related defenses, finding individual responsibility for participation in the planning and execution of the crimes.

## Legal Principles

- States may prosecute certain international crimes under universal jurisdiction when the offenses are regarded as grave violations of the law of nations.
- A state may assert protective jurisdiction over extraterritorial conduct directed at its fundamental interests, including attacks aimed at the destruction of the people it represents.
- Domestic legislation may validly punish conduct that was already criminal under customary international law at the time of commission, consistent with legality principles.
- Irregular or unlawful capture of an accused does not, by itself, bar trial once the accused is before a competent court, absent a controlling legal prohibition.
- Superior orders do not excuse crimes under international law; at most, they may affect mitigation, not guilt, where the accused participated substantially in the criminal enterprise.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Israel affirmed Eichmann’s convictions and death sentence, holding that Israel could prosecute Nazi-era international crimes on universal and protective jurisdiction grounds, that the applicable statute permissibly implemented pre-existing international criminal norms, that abduction from Argentina did not negate jurisdiction, and that obedience to orders did not eliminate individual criminal responsibility.


Attorney-General of the State of Israel v. Eichmann, 36 I.L.R. 277 (Isr. 1962)