Belhas v. Ya’alon is a class action lawsuit brought against the former Head of the IDF Army Intelligence, Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya’alon (ret.), under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA). The suit charges that the defendant’s participation in the shelling of a UN compound in Qana, Lebanon that killed and injured hundreds of civilians constitute war crimes; extrajudicial killing; crimes against humanity; and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

In April 1996, the IDF conducted "Operation Grapes of Wrath," bombing villages in southern Lebanon for three weeks to pressure the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah. Due to the bombings, approximately 400,000 people were forced to leave their homes. Many did not have the means to escape the area and took refuge in places they hoped might provide some safety. Lebanese civilians in the south fled to UN compounds; more than 800 civilians – mostly women, children, and the elderly – had sought refuge in the UN compound in Qana. The IDF then targeted the compound, killing more than 100 civilians and injuring even more.

Lieutenant General Moshe Ya’alon was the head of IDF Army Intelligence on April 18, 1996 when the IDF shelled the UN compound in Qana. The complaint alleges that Ya'alon participated in the decision to shell the compound and had command responsibility for the attack. The suit also alleges that the IDF continued to shell the compound even after the UN specifically notified the IDF that it was shelling a UN position in which civilians were taking shelter.

The plaintiffs include Saadallah Ali Belhas, whose wife and nine children were killed in the attack on the U.N. compound, as well as plaintiff Ali Mohammed Ismail, whose wife and three children were killed. Plaintiffs Ibrahim Khalil Hammoud, Raiman Nasseeb, Hamidah Sharif Deeb, and Hala Yassim Khalil each suffered disabling injuries and lost immediate relatives due to the IDF shelling. The plaintiffs seek damages and declaratory relief.

Plaintiffs argue that Ya’alon is not entitled to immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) because he was retired from the IDF at the time the suit was filed, and as a former official who acted outside the scope of his lawful authority in participating in the decision to shell the UN compound, he is not entitled to immunity. Plaintiffs further argue that to allow immunity for claims brought under the TVPA defeats the very purpose of the Act. Plaintiffs also submit that discovery is warranted, as an inquiry into Ya’alon’s duties and responsibilities is necessary to determine whether he was acting within the scope of his authority, and thus, in his official capacity.