A disturbing exchange during a recent episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored has sparked outrage after Professor Mohammad Marandi confronted American lawyer Alan Dershowitz over allegations of sexual abuse involving Palestinian detainees.
During the heated debate, Marandi referred to allegations that Palestinians held in Israeli detention had been raped or sexually assaulted by prison guards.
Dershowitz responded: “It was done by dogs.”
The remark immediately raised an obvious and deeply troubling question: how would that make the alleged abuse any less horrific?
The interview featured Marandi and Dershowitz debating Israel, Iran and the wider Middle East conflict on Piers Morgan’s program. The discussion became increasingly confrontational as both men traded accusations. :contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}
An alleged act of sexual torture
The allegations discussed during the interview remain allegations and must be independently investigated. However, using an animal to sexually violate a prisoner would still constitute an extreme form of sexual violence, humiliation and torture.
The fact that a dog may allegedly have been used does not remove human responsibility.
Animals do not organise detention systems, issue orders or supervise prisoners. If guards directed, facilitated, encouraged or knowingly permitted such an assault, the responsibility would remain with the people involved.
For that reason, Dershowitz’s response did not provide a meaningful rebuttal to Marandi’s accusation. Instead, many viewers may interpret it as acknowledging the alleged method while attempting to dispute who physically committed the assault.
The victims’ identity should not matter
Claims of rape and sexual torture must be treated seriously regardless of whether the alleged victims are Israeli, Palestinian or from any other background.
Human rights cannot depend on nationality, religion or political allegiance.
When allegations this serious emerge, they should not be dismissed as propaganda without examination. Equally, they should not be presented as conclusively proven without credible evidence and a proper investigation.
The appropriate response is an independent inquiry with access to detainees, medical documentation, witnesses, detention facilities and those accused of responsibility.
Accountability must include those who enable abuse
International standards recognise that responsibility for mistreatment can extend beyond the person who physically carries out an act.
Commanders, guards or officials may also bear responsibility when they order abuse, assist it, knowingly allow it or fail to prevent it when they have the power to do so.
That principle is crucial in this case. Saying an alleged assault was “done by dogs” does not answer who controlled the animals, who was supervising the detainees or who permitted the alleged conduct.
Those are the questions that require serious investigation.
A response that intensified the controversy
Marandi’s allegation was already confronting. Dershowitz’s answer made the exchange more disturbing because it appeared to focus on the mechanism of the alleged abuse rather than confronting its fundamental horror.
No alleged victim should be dehumanised or denied justice because of their identity.
The allegations must be investigated transparently, and anyone found responsible should face accountability under the law.
Using a dog to sexually assault a detainee would not make the conduct less serious. It would make it an especially calculated and degrading form of alleged torture.