- A substantive and purposeful interpretation of the definition of "a person is a member of a terrorist organization" - Section 2(a) The Counter-Terrorism Law uses broad language "we shall be a people" in order to capture a substantive affiliation, and not just a formal one. The purpose of the law is to prevent the formation of the organization's "critical mass." As soon as the defendant made a claim and declared his subordination despite the organization (finality), he became a "cog" in the organizational system, and thus the purpose of the law was realized.
- Interpretation of the box "Including" - Use of the language of the law in the phrase "including" that follows the definition "We are a people" Indicates an open sample list. Therefore, even if "self-expression" does not appear explicitly in the list, it constitutes a clear case of substantive belonging that falls under the term "a member of a group."
- The paradigm shift and the adoption of the terrorist organization Da'arar changed the "inspirational model"" - The terrorist organization Da'arar Shun has brought about a structural transformation in the institution of companies in order to deal with the high level of counterterrorism and intelligence capabilities (especially in Israel). The organization has moved to "The Inspiration Model" which is based on self-activation, i.e., motivating individuals to take action without the need for direct guidance or hierarchical connection. In this model, which is typical of a decentralized organization, the organization deliberately forgoes direct contact with the activist, transfers the responsibility for the improvement of the membership to the individual, and defines "self-expression" as the act that constitutes the membership. In other words, self-expression is the official protocol set by the organization within the framework of this model, and therefore, the absence of a direct connection should not be seen as an "evidentiary hole", but rather as an accurate implementation of the modern organizational strategy, i.e., proof that the defendant acted exactly according to the organization's instructions.