▁in ▁gr ades ▁ 4 - 1 2 ▁was ▁extremely ▁un reason able . ▁It ▁was ▁held ▁that ▁the ▁court ▁would ▁interven e ▁— ▁al beit ▁on ▁rare ▁occasions ▁and ▁with ▁rest raint ▁— ▁even ▁in ▁dec isions ▁concerning ▁the ▁professional ▁dis cret ion ▁of ▁the ▁authority ▁or ▁the ▁bud gets ▁allocated ▁by ▁it , ▁if ▁these ▁dec isions ▁depart ▁in ▁an ▁extreme ▁manner ▁from ▁the ▁margin ▁of ▁reason ab len ess ▁given ▁to ▁the ▁administrative ▁authority . ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 0 8 , ▁Be in isch ▁ruled ▁on ▁interpretation ▁of ▁the ▁Un law ful ▁Com bat ants ▁Law ▁and ▁the ▁extent ▁to ▁which ▁the ▁law ▁is ▁consistent ▁with ▁international ▁human itar ian ▁law . ▁In ▁her ▁leading ▁judgment , ▁she ▁wrote ▁that ▁the ▁administrative ▁det ention ▁of ▁an ▁" un law ful ▁combat ant " ▁significantly ▁viol ates ▁his ▁right ▁to ▁personal ▁liberty . ▁This ▁was ▁consistent ▁with ▁the ▁basic ▁out look ▁that ▁prev ails ▁in ▁the ▁Isra eli ▁legal ▁system , ▁according ▁to ▁which ▁it ▁is ▁prefer able ▁to ▁u ph old ▁a ▁stat ute ▁by ▁interpret ive ▁means ▁wherever ▁possible , ▁rather ▁than ▁to ▁declare ▁it ▁void ▁for ▁constitution al ▁reasons . ▁ ▁Several ▁appe als ▁were ▁brought ▁before ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁challeng ing ▁specific ▁intern ment ▁orders ▁that ▁were ▁made ▁under ▁the ▁Un law ful ▁Com bat ants ▁Law . ▁In ▁her ▁leading ▁judgment , ▁Be in isch ▁wrote ▁that ▁there ▁is ▁no ▁doubt ▁that ▁the ▁administrative ▁det ention ▁of ▁an ▁“ un law ful ▁combat ant