In a landmark decision on Sunday, Israel's Supreme Court declared that the government has not been providing sufficient food to Palestinian security prisoners, asserting that current rations are below the necessary legal standards for basic subsistence. This ruling mandates immediate enhancements to the nutritional provisions offered to these prisoners.

The verdict, passed with a 2–1 majority, stemmed from legal challenges brought forth in April 2024 by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) and NGO Gisha. These organizations accused National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and the Israel Prison Service (IPS) of intentionally reducing prisoner rations to dangerously low levels. Detainees provided affidavits describing severe hunger, significant weight loss, and scant meals primarily composed of just bread and spread.

Justice Daphne Barak-Erez, representing the majority, emphasized that ensuring adequate nutrition is fundamental to the rule of law. The evidence, she noted, cast "real doubts" on the adequacy of food being supplied in practice. She dismissed the notion that harsher food restrictions for Palestinian prisoners could potentially alleviate the conditions of Israeli hostages still held in Gaza, stating that the suffering of Israeli captives was not mitigated by stricter food regimes in prisons—perhaps even worsened.

The ruling has sparked a sharp rebuke from Ben Gvir, who criticized the Supreme Court for "defending terrorists" at a time when Israeli hostages in Gaza lack similar advocacy. He pledged to continue providing "the most minimal conditions under the law." Justice Minister Yariv Levin supported this view, highlighting the disparity in treatment between the hostages and the prisoners.

This Supreme Court decision arrives amid global warnings about the use of starvation as a weapon of war. At the UN Food Systems Summit in July, Secretary-General António Guterres condemned the employment of hunger as a warfare tactic. Reports from UNRWA indicate severe malnutrition among children in Gaza, with significant starvation-related fatalities and widespread famine-like conditions.

ACRI has hailed the Supreme Court's decision as a significant triumph for the rule of law and human dignity, denouncing what it terms a "systematic starvation policy" by Ben Gvir. This ruling not only addresses immediate health concerns but also underscores the broader implications of using food as a tool of coercion in conflict zones, aligning with global humanitarian standards that reject such practices.