IDF to Review Eligibility of Soldier Treated with Cannabis for Officer Training Course

V was surprised when his request to attend an officers’ course was denied by the IDF after several years. The IDF cited reasons such as V’s shortened working hours, the use of cannabis, and the distance of the training from his place of residence as grounds for disqualification. Despite giving up relief to shorten his activity hours at the base, the army still refused his participation in the officers’ course. V’s lawyers believed that the refusal was due to the stigma surrounding medical cannabis use.

In an effort to pursue his goal of attending an officers’ course, V submitted a request for a ‘professional’ officer’s course, which does not require accommodation on the base. However, the army argued that he did not meet the conditions for this route as he was not returning to military service. After exhausting all other options, V submitted a petition to the High Court, claiming that the army’s demands for him to give up medical cannabis treatment were unreasonable.

V’s petition alleged that his dignity was violated and that he was discriminated against based on his medical disability. He claimed violations of the Fundamental Law on Human Dignity and Freedom and the Law on Equal Rights for Persons with Disabilities by the Ministry of Defense and the IDF. Despite V reconsidering his application to the officers’ course later in the year, he requested the deletion of the petition as a last resort.

The Ono Center for Clinical Social Law’s head emphasized the importance of the IDF allowing adapted military service for those willing to serve, promoting integration and equalization values. The IDF responded to the petition by stating that V’s application for a designated officer’s course would be examined by an authorized committee in the personnel division. As of yet, the Ministry of Defense has not issued a response to the matter.