I write this as both a journalist and a Jew for whom the mitzvah of Pidyon Shevuim, the redemption of captives, is not abstract law but a living obligation. The case of Amiram Ben-Uliel, now more than ten years in detention and for nearly nine years held in conditions his advocates describe as solitary and extreme, demands sober public scrutiny and moral action.

The essential facts are straightforward and have been reported widely. Ben-Uliel was indicted for the 2015 arson attack in the West Bank village of Duma that killed an 18-month-old child and his parents. In 2020, a court convicted him of three counts of murder and related charges and later sentenced him to multiple life terms. Israeli courts, including an appeal panel of the Supreme Court, have upheld the conviction and the sentences.

At the same time, the case is marked by deep, unresolved questions that go to the heart of justice and to Jewish moral duty. Ben-Uliel and his supporters assert that his conviction rests principally on a confession obtained after harsh interrogations by the General Security Service, known as the Shin Bet.

Human rights groups, legal analysts and advocacy organizations have raised alarms about the use of “special measures” or coercive interrogation techniques in this and related cases. Those critics argue that confessions obtained under such conditions are unreliable and that courts have established a dangerous precedent by admitting them.

The Supreme Court judges who reviewed Ben-Uliel’s appeal wrote that they had “no doubt” about his guilt after viewing the confession and related evidence. Yet the court also acknowledged the exceptional and troubling circumstances surrounding some of the interrogations. The tension is evident: a court affirming a conviction while expressing unease about the means by which part of the case was developed.

Critically, the Duma case did not rest on eyewitness identification that placed Ben-Uliel at the scene. Reports from the time show that there were no direct eyewitnesses who identified him committing the act, and at least some local accounts suggested competing lines of suspicion. Supporters say those alternative leads were not thoroughly pursued once the investigation focused on Jewish suspects. Courts and prosecutors have rejected those arguments and found the broader evidentiary picture sufficient.

For nearly a decade, Ben-Uliel’s supporters say he has endured extreme isolation. Multiple reports and advocacy groups have documented his restricted conditions: limited hours outside his cell, separated visits, and very constrained contact with family and counsel. These are not merely administrative details. Prolonged isolation carries profound physical and psychological costs and, when paired with allegations of coercive interrogation, raises serious rule of law concerns.

What should observers who love Israel and its moral standing do? First, insist on due process and judicial transparency for all citizens. The legitimacy of Israel’s legal system depends on perceived fairness. When courts allow evidence obtained under controversial methods to stand without full, publicly available explanations, the credibility of verdicts is harmed in the eyes of many, both within Israel’s broad center and among those who defend Israel abroad. Legal remedy in Ben-Uliel’s case has, for now, been exhausted in the courts.

Second, families, community leaders, and diplomats who truly uphold Jewish and Zionist moral values can take practical and immediate steps. I urge those who believe in justice to raise Ben-Uliel’s case respectfully with Israeli diplomats and consular officials, to request fuller disclosure about interrogation methods, and to press for review mechanisms that protect both security and due process.

On Rosh HaShana, the Jewish New Year, communal attention naturally turns to prayer, repentance, and acts of charity. The ancient duty of Pidyon Shevuim calls us not only to prayers but to concrete advocacy for the freedom of captives whose treatment is in doubt.

Finally, a sober reminder. Serious crimes must be investigated and punished. The Dawabsheh family endured an atrocity that shocked many Israelis. If the courts are correct, the state was right to prosecute and convict. If, however, the conviction relied on evidence that was elicited through means inconsistent with justice, then we are obliged as a people and as a democracy to say so and to seek correction. Silence in the face of procedural questions corrodes the moral capital Israel needs to stand for law and for Jewish values.

On Rosh HaShana the tradition urges us to open the book of life with hearts renewed. For those who accept the possibility that Amiram Ben-Uliel’s confinement reflects not only punishment but also potential miscarriage, the mitzvah of Pidyon Shevuim remains urgent. Redemption of captives is both a communal obligation and a test of our commitment to justice.

I call on rabbis, community leaders, diplomats, and citizens who cherish Israel to examine the facts, press for full transparency, and, where appropriate, act to redeem a captive whose supporters say was wrongfully confined.

— David Bedein, Jerusalem

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR