18 dec 2014
Press Release: Israeli Supreme Court approves regulations that ban Palestinians from Gaza from entering Israel for their compensation cases against the Israeli military.
On 16 December 2014, the Supreme Court of Israel rejected a petition submitted by human rights organizations against Israel’s policy of preventing residents of Gaza who have submitted compensation lawsuits for damages against the Israeli military, and their witnesses, from entering Israel to attend their own court hearings.
Adalah filed the petition in 2012 in cooperation with the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and Physicians for Human Rights – Israel on behalf of four individuals from Gaza who filed tort lawsuits against the Israeli military for killings, injuries and extensive property damages and whose requests for permission to enter Israel to pursue their cases were repeatedly denied.
Former Adalah Attorney Fatmeh El-'Ajou filed the case. Adalah General Director Attorney Hassan Jabareen and Adalah Attorney Sawsan Zaher represented the petitioners before the Supreme Court.
Although the Court rejected the petition, in the judgment pointed out the conflict of interests created by this policy between the state's position as the defendant before the court and as the authority that determines who can and who cannot enter Israel to access the court.
Justice Elyakim Rubinstein stated in the decision that the state simultaneously wears two hats, as the party “responsible for security on the one hand, and as the defendant on the other,” and that “it must take care as far as possible not to confuse the two issues.”
After the petition was filed, the Attorney General (AG) proposed new procedures before the Supreme Court for “examining requests to enter by Palestinian residents of Gaza for the purpose of pursuing judicial proceedings in Israel.”
These regulations openly and absurdly specified that the AG should look into the possibility of facilitating the pursuit of legal cases only provided that it does not harm the state’s position in the case.
In response to the petitioners’ argument that these regulations resulted in clear conflict of interests, the justices stated in their final judgment that, “We do not deny that we have criticisms regarding this section [of the regulations]… but the question goes back to the two hats that the state wears in this case, as we have stated above.”
In its decision, the court did not address the grave violation of the constitutional rights of the complainants and of their rights to compensation for damages incurred by them resulting from the state’s policy of closure. Justice Rubinstein stated that the case should not be viewed, “from a constitutional perspective, but a practical perspective…” adding that the filing and pursuit of lawsuits must not “harm security.”
Although the court criticized the new regulations, it is nonetheless asking the complainants to abide by them. The fact is that the AG did not provide one example of an individual who obtained a permit to enter Israel under these regulations.
The court’s judgment effectively denies Gaza residents the possibility of accessing courts in Israel, and it endorses a set of illegal regulations that violate the complainants’ constitutional rights.
The regulations further prevent lawyers who are citizens of Israel from holding meetings with their clients from the Gaza Strip to pursue these cases.
The lack of an effective means of accessing the Israel courts will lead to the dismissal of these tort lawsuits on the grounds that the complainant or his/her eyewitnesses failed to attend court hearings.
Responding to the decision, Adalah’s General Director Attorney Hassan Jabareen stated that,
“The court’s decision is fundamentally at odds with international humanitarian law, which clearly and definitely establishes the right of victims, who live under Occupation, to submit claims for damages to the courts of the occupying power, and stipulates that the legal proceedings available to them should be effective and just. The decision also contradicts claims made by the Israeli Foreign Ministry before the courts of European states that Palestinians have the opportunity to submit lawsuits to the Israeli courts and that there is therefore no need for foreign courts to decide on this matter.”
Raji Sourani, the Director of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights stated in response to the decision:
"After a series of administrative and legislative measures, which concluded with Amendment No 8 of the Tort Law, this Supreme Court decision provides clear cut evidence of total injustice for Palestinian victims of Israeli war crimes. It declares boldly and unequivocally from the highest judicial level that the system is boycotting the victims, and not vice versa. With this decision, the court shamefully states that Palestinians have no other choice to achieve justice and dignity but through international justice mechanisms."
Issam Younis, the Director of the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights in Gaza emphasized in response to the Court's judgment:
"Yet again, the Israeli justice system is dealing with politics rather than justice, and denies victims of serious violations of international law any chance to seek redress. The dozens of victims of such violations in Gaza get a clear message from the Israeli Supreme Court: no matter what you suffer, there is no chance to expect justice in the Israeli court system. Unless the international community intervenes to protect this assault on international law, we can only expect the worst.”
Case Citation: HCJ 7042/12, Abu Daqqa, et al. v. the Interior Minister, et al. (judgment delivered 16 December 2014)
On 16 December 2014, the Supreme Court of Israel rejected a petition submitted by human rights organizations against Israel’s policy of preventing residents of Gaza who have submitted compensation lawsuits for damages against the Israeli military, and their witnesses, from entering Israel to attend their own court hearings.
Adalah filed the petition in 2012 in cooperation with the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and Physicians for Human Rights – Israel on behalf of four individuals from Gaza who filed tort lawsuits against the Israeli military for killings, injuries and extensive property damages and whose requests for permission to enter Israel to pursue their cases were repeatedly denied.
Former Adalah Attorney Fatmeh El-'Ajou filed the case. Adalah General Director Attorney Hassan Jabareen and Adalah Attorney Sawsan Zaher represented the petitioners before the Supreme Court.
Although the Court rejected the petition, in the judgment pointed out the conflict of interests created by this policy between the state's position as the defendant before the court and as the authority that determines who can and who cannot enter Israel to access the court.
Justice Elyakim Rubinstein stated in the decision that the state simultaneously wears two hats, as the party “responsible for security on the one hand, and as the defendant on the other,” and that “it must take care as far as possible not to confuse the two issues.”
After the petition was filed, the Attorney General (AG) proposed new procedures before the Supreme Court for “examining requests to enter by Palestinian residents of Gaza for the purpose of pursuing judicial proceedings in Israel.”
These regulations openly and absurdly specified that the AG should look into the possibility of facilitating the pursuit of legal cases only provided that it does not harm the state’s position in the case.
In response to the petitioners’ argument that these regulations resulted in clear conflict of interests, the justices stated in their final judgment that, “We do not deny that we have criticisms regarding this section [of the regulations]… but the question goes back to the two hats that the state wears in this case, as we have stated above.”
In its decision, the court did not address the grave violation of the constitutional rights of the complainants and of their rights to compensation for damages incurred by them resulting from the state’s policy of closure. Justice Rubinstein stated that the case should not be viewed, “from a constitutional perspective, but a practical perspective…” adding that the filing and pursuit of lawsuits must not “harm security.”
Although the court criticized the new regulations, it is nonetheless asking the complainants to abide by them. The fact is that the AG did not provide one example of an individual who obtained a permit to enter Israel under these regulations.
The court’s judgment effectively denies Gaza residents the possibility of accessing courts in Israel, and it endorses a set of illegal regulations that violate the complainants’ constitutional rights.
The regulations further prevent lawyers who are citizens of Israel from holding meetings with their clients from the Gaza Strip to pursue these cases.
The lack of an effective means of accessing the Israel courts will lead to the dismissal of these tort lawsuits on the grounds that the complainant or his/her eyewitnesses failed to attend court hearings.
Responding to the decision, Adalah’s General Director Attorney Hassan Jabareen stated that,
“The court’s decision is fundamentally at odds with international humanitarian law, which clearly and definitely establishes the right of victims, who live under Occupation, to submit claims for damages to the courts of the occupying power, and stipulates that the legal proceedings available to them should be effective and just. The decision also contradicts claims made by the Israeli Foreign Ministry before the courts of European states that Palestinians have the opportunity to submit lawsuits to the Israeli courts and that there is therefore no need for foreign courts to decide on this matter.”
Raji Sourani, the Director of the Palestinian Center for Human Rights stated in response to the decision:
"After a series of administrative and legislative measures, which concluded with Amendment No 8 of the Tort Law, this Supreme Court decision provides clear cut evidence of total injustice for Palestinian victims of Israeli war crimes. It declares boldly and unequivocally from the highest judicial level that the system is boycotting the victims, and not vice versa. With this decision, the court shamefully states that Palestinians have no other choice to achieve justice and dignity but through international justice mechanisms."
Issam Younis, the Director of the Al Mezan Center for Human Rights in Gaza emphasized in response to the Court's judgment:
"Yet again, the Israeli justice system is dealing with politics rather than justice, and denies victims of serious violations of international law any chance to seek redress. The dozens of victims of such violations in Gaza get a clear message from the Israeli Supreme Court: no matter what you suffer, there is no chance to expect justice in the Israeli court system. Unless the international community intervenes to protect this assault on international law, we can only expect the worst.”
Case Citation: HCJ 7042/12, Abu Daqqa, et al. v. the Interior Minister, et al. (judgment delivered 16 December 2014)
The Israeli High Court of Justice on Tuesday turned down an urgent petition asking that a resident of the Gaza Strip be permitted by Israeli authorities to attend the funeral of his infant son, who died the day before in a West Bank town, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper said Wednesday.
The petition on behalf of Gazan Bakr Hafi was filed by the Israeli human rights group Hamoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual, the newspaper added.
Hamoked had been informed by Israel’s Coordination and Liaison Administration for Gaza that Hafi, 44, was prohibited from leaving the Strip on security grounds, the same source said.
Hafi moved to the West Bank from Gaza in 1999, but since the Israeli occupation has for over 20 years prohibited Gaza citizens from residing in the West Bank without special permits, he was deported to Gaza in 2004.
According to the newspaper, since then Hafi returned to the West Bank twice and was expelled each time, most recently in 2009, even though by then he had been married to a West Bank resident and had two daughters there.
After his arrest in 2009 Hafi was interrogated by the Shin Bet security service for several weeks in the Shikma prison, but no charges were lodged against him and he was sent back to the Strip.
His wife visited him in Gaza in 2012, entering by way of Egypt since she could not receive an Israeli permit to enter the Strip by way of the Erez checkpoint. She gave birth to their child, Emir, in Tulkarem in 2013.
When it turned out that the boy suffered from a genetic illness, the family requested that the father be allowed to visit him even for just one day
In the urgent petition filed on behalf of Hafi, attorney Nasr Ouda wrote that his client was “denied the right of exercising his parenthood and the right of supporting his wife during their son’s serious illness.
The father now requests that the court not deny him the opportunity to see his son for the first and last time, and to be by his wife who has suffered alone for many months, fighting as best she could to overcome her son’s illness,” Haaretz said.
The petition on behalf of Gazan Bakr Hafi was filed by the Israeli human rights group Hamoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual, the newspaper added.
Hamoked had been informed by Israel’s Coordination and Liaison Administration for Gaza that Hafi, 44, was prohibited from leaving the Strip on security grounds, the same source said.
Hafi moved to the West Bank from Gaza in 1999, but since the Israeli occupation has for over 20 years prohibited Gaza citizens from residing in the West Bank without special permits, he was deported to Gaza in 2004.
According to the newspaper, since then Hafi returned to the West Bank twice and was expelled each time, most recently in 2009, even though by then he had been married to a West Bank resident and had two daughters there.
After his arrest in 2009 Hafi was interrogated by the Shin Bet security service for several weeks in the Shikma prison, but no charges were lodged against him and he was sent back to the Strip.
His wife visited him in Gaza in 2012, entering by way of Egypt since she could not receive an Israeli permit to enter the Strip by way of the Erez checkpoint. She gave birth to their child, Emir, in Tulkarem in 2013.
When it turned out that the boy suffered from a genetic illness, the family requested that the father be allowed to visit him even for just one day
In the urgent petition filed on behalf of Hafi, attorney Nasr Ouda wrote that his client was “denied the right of exercising his parenthood and the right of supporting his wife during their son’s serious illness.
The father now requests that the court not deny him the opportunity to see his son for the first and last time, and to be by his wife who has suffered alone for many months, fighting as best she could to overcome her son’s illness,” Haaretz said.
17 dec 2014
The Israeli Salem military court sentenced a young Palestinian man to four and a half years behind bars for throwing stones at Israeli occupation forces (IOF).
Local sources told the PIC reporter that the verdict was passed against 22-year-old Jihad Munir from Yabad village, south of Jenin, on Tuesday.
They said that the sentence also included paying a fine of 4000 shekels, adding that Jihad was “found guilty” of throwing stones at IOF soldiers during confrontations in that village.
They opined that the verdict was exaggerated to serve as deterrence against any future stoning of Israeli soldiers or even participation in such confrontations.
Local sources told the PIC reporter that the verdict was passed against 22-year-old Jihad Munir from Yabad village, south of Jenin, on Tuesday.
They said that the sentence also included paying a fine of 4000 shekels, adding that Jihad was “found guilty” of throwing stones at IOF soldiers during confrontations in that village.
They opined that the verdict was exaggerated to serve as deterrence against any future stoning of Israeli soldiers or even participation in such confrontations.
12 dec 2014
The Israeli public prosecution rejected Thursday evening a court decision to release Palestinian detainee Khader Adnan, family sources said.
The sources pointed out that the Israeli public prosecutor appealed against the court’s decision under the pretext that Adnan had not yet completed his previous sentence.
Earlier Thursday, Salem military court ordered the release of Khader Adnan after spending five months in administrative detention.
Adnan was arrested more than once in Israeli jails where he went on one of the longest hunger strikes in Palestinian history in 2012 to protest his administrative detention before his release on April 17, 2012.
However, Adnan was re-detained in the Jenin village of Arraba on July 8, 2014 as part of Israel's large-scale arrest campaign in occupied West Bank mid-June.
The sources pointed out that the Israeli public prosecutor appealed against the court’s decision under the pretext that Adnan had not yet completed his previous sentence.
Earlier Thursday, Salem military court ordered the release of Khader Adnan after spending five months in administrative detention.
Adnan was arrested more than once in Israeli jails where he went on one of the longest hunger strikes in Palestinian history in 2012 to protest his administrative detention before his release on April 17, 2012.
However, Adnan was re-detained in the Jenin village of Arraba on July 8, 2014 as part of Israel's large-scale arrest campaign in occupied West Bank mid-June.
6 dec 2014
Tristan with his parents, Mike and Nancy Anderson in their home in Grass Valley, California.
Tristan Anderson’s civil trial against the Israeli Military will begin on Sunday 7 December at 10:00, Jerusalem District Court.
Tristan Anderson was critically injured after being shot in the head with a high velocity tear gas grenade by Israeli Border Police following a protest against the construction of the “Separation Wall” in March of 2009 in the West Bank village of Ni’ilin. Anderson, an international solidarity activist from Oakland, California, had arrived in the region a few weeks earlier with his American Jewish girlfriend who also attended demonstrations opposing the seizure of Palestinian land and freedoms for the building of the Wall.
According to its manufacturer, Combined Systems Inc (of the USA), High Velocity Tear Gas grenades are intended as “barricade penetrators” and have a range of several hundred meters. Tristan was shot in the face from about 60 meters away, crushing his skull, blinding him in one of his eyes, and sending shards of bone penetrating deep into his brain.
Tristan Anderson’s civil trial against the Israeli Military will begin on Sunday 7 December at 10:00, Jerusalem District Court.
Tristan Anderson was critically injured after being shot in the head with a high velocity tear gas grenade by Israeli Border Police following a protest against the construction of the “Separation Wall” in March of 2009 in the West Bank village of Ni’ilin. Anderson, an international solidarity activist from Oakland, California, had arrived in the region a few weeks earlier with his American Jewish girlfriend who also attended demonstrations opposing the seizure of Palestinian land and freedoms for the building of the Wall.
According to its manufacturer, Combined Systems Inc (of the USA), High Velocity Tear Gas grenades are intended as “barricade penetrators” and have a range of several hundred meters. Tristan was shot in the face from about 60 meters away, crushing his skull, blinding him in one of his eyes, and sending shards of bone penetrating deep into his brain.
Years later Tristan continues to require around the clock care because of cognitive impairment and physical disability. He is also paralyzed on half his body and uses a wheelchair.
No criminal charges were ever filed against the officers who shot Tristan Anderson and the investigation into his shooting has been widely regarded as a sham.
The family of Tristan Anderson, represented by Israeli human rights attorney Lea Tsemel, have been waiting for years for their day in court.
On the witness stand this week (Sunday 7 Dec and Thurs 11 December) will be other international activists who were with Tristan at the time of his shooting. They will give testimony about the shooting itself, their involvement in the protest movement, and about the checkpoint where Tristan’s ambulance was delayed by Israeli soldiers.
Several Palestinian activists also witnessed the shooting, but have been banned from participating in the trial because they are West Bank residents and the court is in Jerusalem.
Additional court dates (in addition to 7 Dec and 11 Dec) are set for 25 December, 28 December, and 4 January.
Ni’lin continues to hold weekly demonstrations against the Wall.
No criminal charges were ever filed against the officers who shot Tristan Anderson and the investigation into his shooting has been widely regarded as a sham.
The family of Tristan Anderson, represented by Israeli human rights attorney Lea Tsemel, have been waiting for years for their day in court.
On the witness stand this week (Sunday 7 Dec and Thurs 11 December) will be other international activists who were with Tristan at the time of his shooting. They will give testimony about the shooting itself, their involvement in the protest movement, and about the checkpoint where Tristan’s ambulance was delayed by Israeli soldiers.
Several Palestinian activists also witnessed the shooting, but have been banned from participating in the trial because they are West Bank residents and the court is in Jerusalem.
Additional court dates (in addition to 7 Dec and 11 Dec) are set for 25 December, 28 December, and 4 January.
Ni’lin continues to hold weekly demonstrations against the Wall.
4 dec 2014
Salem military court has sentenced activist Murad Eshtewi, from Kufr Qaddum village, to 9 and a half months of prison, with an additional 10,000 shekel fine. Israeli forces arrested Eshtewi on April 29th, 2014 in the middle of the night accusing him of participating in and arranging Kufr Qaddum demonstrations.
The unjust decision of the military court states the following:
· 9 and a half months of actual prison time.
· 10,000 shekel non-refundable fine.
· A 5-year probation period after his prison term, where he cannot participate in any Kufr Qaddum peaceful demonstrations, or he will face a sentence of no less than 12 months in prison.
· A 3 year probation period after his prison term, where he cannot participate in any peaceful demonstrations against the Israeli military anywhere else, otherwise he will face a sentence of no less than 6 months in prison.
Murad has been detained in Majedo (Megiddo) Military Prison since his arrest in April, and has been suffered from many health problems during this time. His lawyer, Adel Samara, states that Murad has lost over 9 kilos in weight due to harsh and unsuitable holding cells.
In a letter from Murad, he stated the following:
“The accusations that I am charged with is unfair because it is our legal right to protest and participate in demonstrations against the occupation and to struggle for our self-determination as Palestinians.” He added that the peaceful marches in Kufr Qaddum will continue even if the occupation suppresses them over and over again.
Since the arrest of Murad, the Israeli army has raised its level of brutality in dealing with Kufr Qaddum demonstrations. 15 protestors have been shot by live bullets, last week alone recorded two live bullet injuries, a local youth and an Italian supporter, shot in cold blood just for participating in peaceful protests.
Murad calls on the international community and the United Nations to support Kufr Qaddum, to open the road closed by Israeli forces, to support the fair quest of a free Palestine, and to end the occupation and its settlers.
“They fine us so they can pay for more guns and weapons to kill us with,” Murad added.
Finally, Murad calls on the people of Kufr Qaddum to keep on struggling against occupation and to never give up.
The unjust decision of the military court states the following:
· 9 and a half months of actual prison time.
· 10,000 shekel non-refundable fine.
· A 5-year probation period after his prison term, where he cannot participate in any Kufr Qaddum peaceful demonstrations, or he will face a sentence of no less than 12 months in prison.
· A 3 year probation period after his prison term, where he cannot participate in any peaceful demonstrations against the Israeli military anywhere else, otherwise he will face a sentence of no less than 6 months in prison.
Murad has been detained in Majedo (Megiddo) Military Prison since his arrest in April, and has been suffered from many health problems during this time. His lawyer, Adel Samara, states that Murad has lost over 9 kilos in weight due to harsh and unsuitable holding cells.
In a letter from Murad, he stated the following:
“The accusations that I am charged with is unfair because it is our legal right to protest and participate in demonstrations against the occupation and to struggle for our self-determination as Palestinians.” He added that the peaceful marches in Kufr Qaddum will continue even if the occupation suppresses them over and over again.
Since the arrest of Murad, the Israeli army has raised its level of brutality in dealing with Kufr Qaddum demonstrations. 15 protestors have been shot by live bullets, last week alone recorded two live bullet injuries, a local youth and an Italian supporter, shot in cold blood just for participating in peaceful protests.
Murad calls on the international community and the United Nations to support Kufr Qaddum, to open the road closed by Israeli forces, to support the fair quest of a free Palestine, and to end the occupation and its settlers.
“They fine us so they can pay for more guns and weapons to kill us with,” Murad added.
Finally, Murad calls on the people of Kufr Qaddum to keep on struggling against occupation and to never give up.
2 dec 2014
The Israeli supreme court is expected on Wednesday to issue a verdict on requests for the demolition of Palestinian homes in east Jerusalem as a punitive measure for deadly attacks on Israelis, according to different news reports.
Although, all the attackers were extrajudicially killed by Israeli security forces at the scenes, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu early in November issued an edict ordering the demolition of the homes of Palestinians whose relatives carried out recent attacks on Israelis.
Netanyahu's decision was condemned by prominent human rights groups as mass punishment.
So far, the Israeli occupation authority carried out only one demolition, when they destroyed the house of Shaludi family on November 19, almost a month after Abdul-Rahman Shaludi rammed his car into Jewish settlers in east Jerusalem and killed two of them.
Israel's punitive demolition of Palestinian homes is part of emergency legislation or regulations that had been adopted by Britain during its mandate of Palestine.
Lawyer Medhat Diba, who defends one of the families whose home is to be razed, told Anadolu news agency that Israel still uses regulation 119 of the emergency legislation created by Britain in 1945, which legalized the forfeiture and demolition of Palestinian property used for hostile activities or attacks at the time.
The Israeli center for the defense of individuals Hamoked described the punitive demolition policy pursued by Israel against the Palestinians alone as a racist measure and collective punishment.
The supreme court of Israel will also study in a hearing to be held on Wednesday a petition filed by Hamoked calling for revoking Israel's punitive demolition policy.
Although, all the attackers were extrajudicially killed by Israeli security forces at the scenes, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu early in November issued an edict ordering the demolition of the homes of Palestinians whose relatives carried out recent attacks on Israelis.
Netanyahu's decision was condemned by prominent human rights groups as mass punishment.
So far, the Israeli occupation authority carried out only one demolition, when they destroyed the house of Shaludi family on November 19, almost a month after Abdul-Rahman Shaludi rammed his car into Jewish settlers in east Jerusalem and killed two of them.
Israel's punitive demolition of Palestinian homes is part of emergency legislation or regulations that had been adopted by Britain during its mandate of Palestine.
Lawyer Medhat Diba, who defends one of the families whose home is to be razed, told Anadolu news agency that Israel still uses regulation 119 of the emergency legislation created by Britain in 1945, which legalized the forfeiture and demolition of Palestinian property used for hostile activities or attacks at the time.
The Israeli center for the defense of individuals Hamoked described the punitive demolition policy pursued by Israel against the Palestinians alone as a racist measure and collective punishment.
The supreme court of Israel will also study in a hearing to be held on Wednesday a petition filed by Hamoked calling for revoking Israel's punitive demolition policy.
29 nov 2014
Secertary General of Fateh Movement in Jerusalem taken into custody
The Israeli Minister of Internal Security has decided to transfer 20-year-old Islam Izzat Natsheh, from Anata, to conditions of administrative detention (imprisonment without charge or trial) for 6 months, in response to the young man's recent Facebook posts. Sadeq Ghaith, from Silwan, was also placed under similar orders.
According to Wadi Hilweh Information Center, in Silwan, Amjad Abu Asab, head of an East Jerusalem committee for families of detainees, explained that the Internal Security Minister transferred Natsheh to administrative detention just four days after he was arrested from his house, in the village of Anata.
Natsheh was interrogated in Al-Maskobyeh for his posts on Facebook and with special regard to a prayer expressing his wish to obtain martyrdom, several days ago. According to Ma'an, Mr. Abu Asab said that Israeli interrogators accused him of planning a terror attack as a result of his post. Al-Natsheh, however, reportedly denied the charge, saying that the post represented "just a wish."
After being unable to prosecute him, the Internal Security Minister decided to transfer him to administrative detention.
The minister issued a similar decision against one Sadeq Gheith, arrested with his brother Adnan, last Tuesday, following a raid on his house in Silwan. His brother is the Secretary-General of the Fateh Movement in Jerusalem, and remains imprisoned.
Ma'an further explains that "administrative detention" refers to the tactic of keeping a prisoner without charge or trial for extended periods of time, often for reasons of "security" concerns.
The tactic, dating back to the days of British Mandate Palestine, is routinely used on Palestinian prisoners by Israeli authorities, even though international law stipulates that it only be used in exceptional circumstances.
According to Israeli human rights groups B'tselem, in August of 2014, 473 Palestinians were being kept in administrative detention in Israeli prisons, down from a high of nearly 1,000 in 2002.
Furthermore, over 1,000 Palestinians from East Jerusalem have been arrested by Israeli forces since June, in one of the biggest campaigns of intimidation and incarceration the city has seen in modern history.
The Israeli Minister of Internal Security has decided to transfer 20-year-old Islam Izzat Natsheh, from Anata, to conditions of administrative detention (imprisonment without charge or trial) for 6 months, in response to the young man's recent Facebook posts. Sadeq Ghaith, from Silwan, was also placed under similar orders.
According to Wadi Hilweh Information Center, in Silwan, Amjad Abu Asab, head of an East Jerusalem committee for families of detainees, explained that the Internal Security Minister transferred Natsheh to administrative detention just four days after he was arrested from his house, in the village of Anata.
Natsheh was interrogated in Al-Maskobyeh for his posts on Facebook and with special regard to a prayer expressing his wish to obtain martyrdom, several days ago. According to Ma'an, Mr. Abu Asab said that Israeli interrogators accused him of planning a terror attack as a result of his post. Al-Natsheh, however, reportedly denied the charge, saying that the post represented "just a wish."
After being unable to prosecute him, the Internal Security Minister decided to transfer him to administrative detention.
The minister issued a similar decision against one Sadeq Gheith, arrested with his brother Adnan, last Tuesday, following a raid on his house in Silwan. His brother is the Secretary-General of the Fateh Movement in Jerusalem, and remains imprisoned.
Ma'an further explains that "administrative detention" refers to the tactic of keeping a prisoner without charge or trial for extended periods of time, often for reasons of "security" concerns.
The tactic, dating back to the days of British Mandate Palestine, is routinely used on Palestinian prisoners by Israeli authorities, even though international law stipulates that it only be used in exceptional circumstances.
According to Israeli human rights groups B'tselem, in August of 2014, 473 Palestinians were being kept in administrative detention in Israeli prisons, down from a high of nearly 1,000 in 2002.
Furthermore, over 1,000 Palestinians from East Jerusalem have been arrested by Israeli forces since June, in one of the biggest campaigns of intimidation and incarceration the city has seen in modern history.
28 nov 2014
The Israeli occupation police neglect 92 percent of the complaints filed by Palestinians citizens about Jewish settlers' attacks, an Israeli organization revealed Thursday.
Statistics published by the human rights group Yesh Din noted that the Israeli authorities close Palestinian complaint files against settlers without finding the perpetrators.
According to the report, only 7.4 percent of the investigation files led to indictments against Israelis suspected of attacking Palestinians and their property, while the vast majority of the complaint filed were closed due to the alleged failure of the police to locate offenders or collect sufficient evidence for prosecution.
The report revealed that over half of the investigations Yesh Din examined were characterized by negligence, lack of professionalism, insufficient investigative actions, and failure to meet accepted investigation standards.
Yesh Din, itself, filed 1,045 complaints on behalf of Palestinians with the Israeli police between 2005 to November 2014, but all to no avail.
The complaints were made about shooting incidents, violent assault, stoning, arson, destroying trees and crops, attacks on animals, construction on Palestinian-owned land, threats, harassment, and other offences committed by Israeli settlers.
Statistics published by the human rights group Yesh Din noted that the Israeli authorities close Palestinian complaint files against settlers without finding the perpetrators.
According to the report, only 7.4 percent of the investigation files led to indictments against Israelis suspected of attacking Palestinians and their property, while the vast majority of the complaint filed were closed due to the alleged failure of the police to locate offenders or collect sufficient evidence for prosecution.
The report revealed that over half of the investigations Yesh Din examined were characterized by negligence, lack of professionalism, insufficient investigative actions, and failure to meet accepted investigation standards.
Yesh Din, itself, filed 1,045 complaints on behalf of Palestinians with the Israeli police between 2005 to November 2014, but all to no avail.
The complaints were made about shooting incidents, violent assault, stoning, arson, destroying trees and crops, attacks on animals, construction on Palestinian-owned land, threats, harassment, and other offences committed by Israeli settlers.
25 nov 2014
Legal adviser to the Israeli Home Front Minister on Monday turned down a petition objecting to Israel’s intents to knock down the Hijazi and Akari family homes in Occupied Jerusalem.
The demolition notice is set to be put into effect on Wednesday morning.
Lawyer of the Akari family, Medhat Diba, said he will petition the Israeli Magistrates’ Court in the next couple of days to reconsider the demolition issue.
The lawyer said the court's rule was motivated by Section 119 of the Israeli Emergency Defense Regulations endorsing the demolition and confiscation of Palestinian estates under the security pretext.
He further warned of the repercussions of the decision on the cluster of homes adjacent to the targeted buildings.
Diba said he filed the petition on the basis that the targeted homes are set over UNRWA-run tracts but the Israeli occupation court turned down the appeal allegedly due to emergency requirements.
Meanwhile, a court hearing was held on Monday at the Magistrate’s court to consider a petition against a ruling for the demolition of the Ja’abis family home in Jabal al-Mukabir.
In another development, the Israeli prosecutor general’s office on Monday transferred jurisdiction over appeals to return the bodies of Ghassan and Udai abu al-Jamal to the police legal adviser, lawyer of Ad-Dameer institution Muhammad Mahmoud said.
He said a rule on the affair is expected to be issued within the next few hours.
Udai and Ghassan passed away following a retaliation-attack on a Jewish synagogue in Occupied Jerusalem, an attack dubbed by historiographers as a natural retort and expected scenario to Israel’s terrorism on Palestinian civilians and Muslims’ sanctuaries.
In another context, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine on Monday slammed the attempts of the Israeli premier Netanyahu to advise a bill to rescind the citizenship of families of Palestinian Jerusalemites involved in anti-Israel attacks.
“Palestinians’ fight for freedom in Occupied Jerusalem is a battle against a racist, cancerous entity that colonized our land and robbed its native owners of their rights,” a PFLP statement read.
The demolition notice is set to be put into effect on Wednesday morning.
Lawyer of the Akari family, Medhat Diba, said he will petition the Israeli Magistrates’ Court in the next couple of days to reconsider the demolition issue.
The lawyer said the court's rule was motivated by Section 119 of the Israeli Emergency Defense Regulations endorsing the demolition and confiscation of Palestinian estates under the security pretext.
He further warned of the repercussions of the decision on the cluster of homes adjacent to the targeted buildings.
Diba said he filed the petition on the basis that the targeted homes are set over UNRWA-run tracts but the Israeli occupation court turned down the appeal allegedly due to emergency requirements.
Meanwhile, a court hearing was held on Monday at the Magistrate’s court to consider a petition against a ruling for the demolition of the Ja’abis family home in Jabal al-Mukabir.
In another development, the Israeli prosecutor general’s office on Monday transferred jurisdiction over appeals to return the bodies of Ghassan and Udai abu al-Jamal to the police legal adviser, lawyer of Ad-Dameer institution Muhammad Mahmoud said.
He said a rule on the affair is expected to be issued within the next few hours.
Udai and Ghassan passed away following a retaliation-attack on a Jewish synagogue in Occupied Jerusalem, an attack dubbed by historiographers as a natural retort and expected scenario to Israel’s terrorism on Palestinian civilians and Muslims’ sanctuaries.
In another context, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine on Monday slammed the attempts of the Israeli premier Netanyahu to advise a bill to rescind the citizenship of families of Palestinian Jerusalemites involved in anti-Israel attacks.
“Palestinians’ fight for freedom in Occupied Jerusalem is a battle against a racist, cancerous entity that colonized our land and robbed its native owners of their rights,” a PFLP statement read.
19 nov 2014
The lawyer of Al-Dameer organization, Mohammad Mahmoud, said that the District court judge decided on Wednesday night not to give Al-Jamal family the bodies of their two sons (Ghassan and Odai) until further notice.
The judge agreed to the request of the Intelligence not to release the bodies to their families until the Israeli political leadership issues its order regarding the bodies.
The Intelligence claimed that not releasing the bodies would be a deterrent to other young people not to do similar operations described as “terrorist”. Lawyer Mahmoud responded and confirmed that the Israeli procedures of not releasing the bodies and demolishing the houses will not be a deterrent to the Palestinians.
The judge requested the Israeli police to make their decision as soon as possible regarding the Martyrs’ bodies and any illogical delay will give the family’s lawyer a reason to submit a new request to receive the bodies.
The judge agreed to the request of the Intelligence not to release the bodies to their families until the Israeli political leadership issues its order regarding the bodies.
The Intelligence claimed that not releasing the bodies would be a deterrent to other young people not to do similar operations described as “terrorist”. Lawyer Mahmoud responded and confirmed that the Israeli procedures of not releasing the bodies and demolishing the houses will not be a deterrent to the Palestinians.
The judge requested the Israeli police to make their decision as soon as possible regarding the Martyrs’ bodies and any illogical delay will give the family’s lawyer a reason to submit a new request to receive the bodies.
6 nov 2014
|
|
2 nov 2014
Settlers trowing stones go free?
The Israeli ministerial committee for legislation is expected to approve a proposed law which imposes a prison sentence of 20 years against any Palestinian who throws stones toward Israeli vehicles.
According to Al Ray Palestinian Media Agency, the proposed law suggested by Israeli Minister of Justice, Tzibi Lvini, intends to raise the punishment of stone throwing at Israeli passersby up to twenty years, and five years for those who throw stones against Israeli forces .
Israeli news outlet Yedioth Ahronoth points out that the decision imposes an additional financial fine on families, as many participants in the current clashes in Jerusalem are minors, where the law does not allow to impose a severe penalties against them, such as high fines and long prison sentence.
The Israeli ministerial committee for legislation is expected to approve a proposed law which imposes a prison sentence of 20 years against any Palestinian who throws stones toward Israeli vehicles.
According to Al Ray Palestinian Media Agency, the proposed law suggested by Israeli Minister of Justice, Tzibi Lvini, intends to raise the punishment of stone throwing at Israeli passersby up to twenty years, and five years for those who throw stones against Israeli forces .
Israeli news outlet Yedioth Ahronoth points out that the decision imposes an additional financial fine on families, as many participants in the current clashes in Jerusalem are minors, where the law does not allow to impose a severe penalties against them, such as high fines and long prison sentence.
3 oct 2014
Mohammad Abu Khdeir
The Israeli Regional Court in occupied Jerusalem has decided to open its court sessions for the case of murdered Palestinian teen Mohammad Abu Khdeir to the public, but kept the gag order on the identity of underage Israelis involved in his brutal torture and murder.
Israel initially only allowed the immediate family of Abu Khdeir to attend the deliberations, and kept sensitive details from reaching the public.
The latest court session was held in August, while the family of Abu Khdeir said, then, that they do not trust Israel’s legal system, and threatened to seek justice in international courts to prosecute Israel for not punishing those responsible for the horrific crime.
Family lawyer Mohannad Jabara said that the court session was technical and superficial, only concerned in the request of defendants' lawyers to release them until the end of deliberations.
Jabara said the only adult, 29 years of age, who stands accused of this brutal murder agreed to stay imprisoned until a verdict is read, while the underage suspects are demanding to be released under a different deal, including house arrest.
The court said it would look into the issue next week.
The adult, Yousef Hayim Ben David, confessed to the abduction of Abu Khdeir, and to burning him to death after torturing him.
Israeli investigators believe that Ben David, and two minors, carried out the abduction and murder, and that he drove Abu Khdeir to a forest, after abducting him in front of his home.
He then struck him to the head using a wrench before continuously kicking him and, then, burning him using fuel that was also poured down his throat.
Lawyers of Ben David are alleging that he has mental issues and, therefore, was not aware of what he was doing.
However, the circumstances and evidence prove that he was fully aware of his actions, especially when taking into consideration all aspects of the crime, the abduction, the accomplices and the locations of both the abduction and murder.
The crime led to extensive protests in different parts of occupied Jerusalem, and extended to the occupied West Bank.
The Israeli Regional Court in occupied Jerusalem has decided to open its court sessions for the case of murdered Palestinian teen Mohammad Abu Khdeir to the public, but kept the gag order on the identity of underage Israelis involved in his brutal torture and murder.
Israel initially only allowed the immediate family of Abu Khdeir to attend the deliberations, and kept sensitive details from reaching the public.
The latest court session was held in August, while the family of Abu Khdeir said, then, that they do not trust Israel’s legal system, and threatened to seek justice in international courts to prosecute Israel for not punishing those responsible for the horrific crime.
Family lawyer Mohannad Jabara said that the court session was technical and superficial, only concerned in the request of defendants' lawyers to release them until the end of deliberations.
Jabara said the only adult, 29 years of age, who stands accused of this brutal murder agreed to stay imprisoned until a verdict is read, while the underage suspects are demanding to be released under a different deal, including house arrest.
The court said it would look into the issue next week.
The adult, Yousef Hayim Ben David, confessed to the abduction of Abu Khdeir, and to burning him to death after torturing him.
Israeli investigators believe that Ben David, and two minors, carried out the abduction and murder, and that he drove Abu Khdeir to a forest, after abducting him in front of his home.
He then struck him to the head using a wrench before continuously kicking him and, then, burning him using fuel that was also poured down his throat.
Lawyers of Ben David are alleging that he has mental issues and, therefore, was not aware of what he was doing.
However, the circumstances and evidence prove that he was fully aware of his actions, especially when taking into consideration all aspects of the crime, the abduction, the accomplices and the locations of both the abduction and murder.
The crime led to extensive protests in different parts of occupied Jerusalem, and extended to the occupied West Bank.
