Israel uses ‘battlefield evidence’ to prosecute Palestinians abroad

What Happened

Israeli intelligence has been providing so-called 'battlefield evidence'—material allegedly seized from Gaza hospitals and other sites during military operations—to European counterparts, leading to the prosecution of Palestinian activists on charges of financing Hamas. In Italy, Mohammad Hannoun, a Jordanian national and head of the Association of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (ABSPP), was arrested in December 2024 on allegations of raising €7 million for Hamas; Italy's Supreme Court of Cassation last month ordered a 'comprehensive re-evaluation' of the evidence, describing it as too 'generic.' In the Netherlands, Amin Abu Rashid, a Dutch national of Palestinian origin, was acquitted by the Rotterdam District Court after a years-long legal battle, with the court rejecting evidence that relied on Israeli government reports and unverified media articles. In both cases, the evidence—sent by Israeli intelligence official Avi Abramson via a 'spontaneous information exchange'—lacked a chain of custody and bypassed Eurojust and UN oversight mechanisms.

Key Actors

Why It Matters

The cases expose a pattern of European legal systems relying on unverifiable Israeli 'battlefield evidence'—collected during active combat in Gaza without documented chain of custody—to prosecute Palestinian activists, a practice that critics say launders intelligence to suppress dissent and undermines rule of law. The acquittal in the Netherlands and the Italian court's pushback signal judicial skepticism, potentially affecting dozens of similar cases in Europe. It also complicates Israel's diplomatic standing as it faces war crimes investigations at the ICC and ICJ.

Watch For

The Italian Supreme Court's mandated re-evaluation of evidence in Hannoun's case will determine whether charges proceed or are dropped, setting a key precedent. Further decisions in other European jurisdictions, especially where Israeli intelligence is used, could emerge. The outcome may influence ongoing ICC and ICJ proceedings by underscoring the unreliability of Israel's wartime evidence collection.