21 apr 2015
Iranian-born Belgian citizen sentenced to seven years for posing as a businessman.
An Israeli court sentenced an Iranian-born Belgian to seven years in prison Tuesday after convicting him of spying for Tehran posing as a businessman.
Ali Mansouri was arrested at Ben Gurion airport in 2013 as he attempted to leave the country carrying photographs of the US embassy in Tel Aviv and other sites, Israel's Shin Bet domestic security service said. He was sentenced for "aiding an enemy during war" and "espionage" on behalf of Iran's elite Republican Guard, court documents showed.
Defense lawyer Avidgor Feldman said he did not expect to appeal. "The court heard our arguments that the security of Israel was not compromised," Feldman told reporters after the hearing in the central city of Lod. "It was the Iranian secret services who put pressure on him and his family, and we feel that this verdict was rather fair and reasonable in view of the circumstances." Two armed guards led the handcuffed Mansouri into the dock, separated from the mostly empty court room by a glass screen, an AFP correspondent said.
The bespectacled 56-year-old looked bemused as the sentence was handed down in Hebrew. His lawyer approached the screen to inform Mansouri of the sentence in English. "Seven years... okay?" Feldman said. "I want to see you," Mansouri responded. The Shin Bet claimed that Mansouri, who acquired Belgian nationality through marriage, had enrolled in a special operations unit of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards after being recruited in 2012.
According to the indictment, he was given "an espionage mission aimed at harming Israel's security," and visited the country three times. He was to pretend to be "an innocent businessman and establish a company in Israel" that would serve as infrastructure for espionage by another Iranian man who would arrive later.
The prosecution said Mansouri confessed his ties to Iranian intelligence. During questioning he said he had been promised $1 million as a reward to use his position to set up companies in Israel on behalf of Iranian intelligence to "harm Israeli and Western interests." Using the alias Alex Mans, Mansouri is accused of entering Israel using his Belgian passport in July 2012, before later briefing his handlers in Iran on his progress and security at Ben Gurion airport.
In January 2013 Mansouri again entered Israel, and took photographs of the US embassy in Tel Aviv and an unnamed security installation before another debriefing in Iran. Mansouri arrived again on September 6 for meetings to open a factory and, according to the indictment, "serve Iranian intelligence in the future." He was arrested at the airport on September 11, 2013, as he sought to leave Israel.
An Israeli court sentenced an Iranian-born Belgian to seven years in prison Tuesday after convicting him of spying for Tehran posing as a businessman.
Ali Mansouri was arrested at Ben Gurion airport in 2013 as he attempted to leave the country carrying photographs of the US embassy in Tel Aviv and other sites, Israel's Shin Bet domestic security service said. He was sentenced for "aiding an enemy during war" and "espionage" on behalf of Iran's elite Republican Guard, court documents showed.
Defense lawyer Avidgor Feldman said he did not expect to appeal. "The court heard our arguments that the security of Israel was not compromised," Feldman told reporters after the hearing in the central city of Lod. "It was the Iranian secret services who put pressure on him and his family, and we feel that this verdict was rather fair and reasonable in view of the circumstances." Two armed guards led the handcuffed Mansouri into the dock, separated from the mostly empty court room by a glass screen, an AFP correspondent said.
The bespectacled 56-year-old looked bemused as the sentence was handed down in Hebrew. His lawyer approached the screen to inform Mansouri of the sentence in English. "Seven years... okay?" Feldman said. "I want to see you," Mansouri responded. The Shin Bet claimed that Mansouri, who acquired Belgian nationality through marriage, had enrolled in a special operations unit of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards after being recruited in 2012.
According to the indictment, he was given "an espionage mission aimed at harming Israel's security," and visited the country three times. He was to pretend to be "an innocent businessman and establish a company in Israel" that would serve as infrastructure for espionage by another Iranian man who would arrive later.
The prosecution said Mansouri confessed his ties to Iranian intelligence. During questioning he said he had been promised $1 million as a reward to use his position to set up companies in Israel on behalf of Iranian intelligence to "harm Israeli and Western interests." Using the alias Alex Mans, Mansouri is accused of entering Israel using his Belgian passport in July 2012, before later briefing his handlers in Iran on his progress and security at Ben Gurion airport.
In January 2013 Mansouri again entered Israel, and took photographs of the US embassy in Tel Aviv and an unnamed security installation before another debriefing in Iran. Mansouri arrived again on September 6 for meetings to open a factory and, according to the indictment, "serve Iranian intelligence in the future." He was arrested at the airport on September 11, 2013, as he sought to leave Israel.
Khaled Kutina, who rammed his car into 2 Israelis killing one and seriously wounding another, admitted to committing attack as revenge for his 'miserable life'.
Khaled Kutina confessed to deliberately ramming his car at two Israelis waiting for the bus in Jerusalem last week, killing a man and wounding a woman, it was cleared for publication on Tuesday.
The investigation found that several hours before the attack, Kutina drove his family from 'Anata to East Jerusalem. At the exit from 'Anata, the car was held at a checkpoint, which Kutina said made him angry. He decided to commit the attack after dropping off his family. In his interrogation, 37-year-old Kutina admitted he was driving along Highway 1 looking for Jews to harm as revenge for his "miserable life."
The investigation found that several hours before the attack, Kutina drove his family from 'Anata to East Jerusalem. At the exit from 'Anata, the car was held at a checkpoint, which Kutina said made him angry. He decided to commit the attack after dropping off his family. In his interrogation, 37-year-old Kutina admitted he was driving along Highway 1 looking for Jews to harm as revenge for his "miserable life."
Jerusalem Police and Border Police forces that arrived at the scene apprehended him. Shalom Yohai Cherki, who was critically wounded, succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. The second victim, Shira Klein remains in serious condition at the Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem's Ein Karem.
Kutina's lawyer, Nasser Massis, said at a hearing on Thursday that the incident in Jerusalem was an accident that could've been caused due to mechanical failure in the car.
In his initial interrogation, Kutina told police investigators that he felt like he was "being chased by an Egged bus" which is why he had no choice but to veer off his lane. Later on he admitted to lying and said he gave his first version so police would think he was mentally ill. During the investigation he was sent to two psychiatric evaluations and was found fit to stand trial.
At Kutina's remand extension hearing on Thursday, a police representative said that after questioning the suspect and his relatives, it was revealed he was hospitalized at the Jerusalem Mental Health Center in the past. The initial investigation also found that Kutina has been taking anti-depressants for the past eight years.
According to the psychiatrist, the suspect was lucid, present and rejects having suicidal thoughts. The psychiatrist went on to say Kutina understands the different roles in the court as well as what he was arrested for, noting there is no evidence of a severe mental state that would require hospitalization.
While the judge extended Kutina's remand until Friday based on this psychiatric opinion, she recommended the prison doctor monitor him out of concern Kutina would hurt himself.
Police said Kutina is married and known as a very religious man who worked as a cleaner at a mosque in 'Anata. He used to send his friends text messages that were religious in nature, praising Prophet Muhammad.
Ynet reported Monday that a year and a half ago, the Health Ministry tried to suspend Kutina's driver's license pending the examination of his mental state. However, the move fell between the cracks due to the lack of coordination with the Transportation Ministry - which might have not received the Health Ministry's request at all.
He was also convicted in 2012 of intentionally causing damage to property.
Khaled Kutina confessed to deliberately ramming his car at two Israelis waiting for the bus in Jerusalem last week, killing a man and wounding a woman, it was cleared for publication on Tuesday.
The investigation found that several hours before the attack, Kutina drove his family from 'Anata to East Jerusalem. At the exit from 'Anata, the car was held at a checkpoint, which Kutina said made him angry. He decided to commit the attack after dropping off his family. In his interrogation, 37-year-old Kutina admitted he was driving along Highway 1 looking for Jews to harm as revenge for his "miserable life."
The investigation found that several hours before the attack, Kutina drove his family from 'Anata to East Jerusalem. At the exit from 'Anata, the car was held at a checkpoint, which Kutina said made him angry. He decided to commit the attack after dropping off his family. In his interrogation, 37-year-old Kutina admitted he was driving along Highway 1 looking for Jews to harm as revenge for his "miserable life."
Jerusalem Police and Border Police forces that arrived at the scene apprehended him. Shalom Yohai Cherki, who was critically wounded, succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. The second victim, Shira Klein remains in serious condition at the Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem's Ein Karem.
Kutina's lawyer, Nasser Massis, said at a hearing on Thursday that the incident in Jerusalem was an accident that could've been caused due to mechanical failure in the car.
In his initial interrogation, Kutina told police investigators that he felt like he was "being chased by an Egged bus" which is why he had no choice but to veer off his lane. Later on he admitted to lying and said he gave his first version so police would think he was mentally ill. During the investigation he was sent to two psychiatric evaluations and was found fit to stand trial.
At Kutina's remand extension hearing on Thursday, a police representative said that after questioning the suspect and his relatives, it was revealed he was hospitalized at the Jerusalem Mental Health Center in the past. The initial investigation also found that Kutina has been taking anti-depressants for the past eight years.
According to the psychiatrist, the suspect was lucid, present and rejects having suicidal thoughts. The psychiatrist went on to say Kutina understands the different roles in the court as well as what he was arrested for, noting there is no evidence of a severe mental state that would require hospitalization.
While the judge extended Kutina's remand until Friday based on this psychiatric opinion, she recommended the prison doctor monitor him out of concern Kutina would hurt himself.
Police said Kutina is married and known as a very religious man who worked as a cleaner at a mosque in 'Anata. He used to send his friends text messages that were religious in nature, praising Prophet Muhammad.
Ynet reported Monday that a year and a half ago, the Health Ministry tried to suspend Kutina's driver's license pending the examination of his mental state. However, the move fell between the cracks due to the lack of coordination with the Transportation Ministry - which might have not received the Health Ministry's request at all.
He was also convicted in 2012 of intentionally causing damage to property.
Palestinian teen, who was burned alive by Jewish settlers, was added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl; 'This is a great initiative to honor my son, but I'm more interested in justice,' says father.
Mohammed Abu Khdeir, the Palestinian teenager from East Jerusalem who was kidnapped and murdered by Jewish settlers last summer, has been added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl, Israel Radio reported on Tuesday morning.
His name was also added to the list of terror victims in the government-run website. The Defense Ministry recognized Abu Khdeir as a victim of "hostile action" in July, some two weeks after he was murdered.
Hussein Abu Khdeir, Mohammed's father, told Ynet that "this is a great initiative meant to honor my son, but I'm more interested with something else entirely: For the court to do justice with those who burned my son alive, and sentence them to the appropriate punishment." Hussein was referring to the fact defense lawyers for some of the accused plan to claim their clients are mentally unfit to stand trial.
"My son is gone, my son was burned and we were burned with him. I want justice and not honor. What good is it going to do me if they carve his name in stone?" Hussein said. Mohammed Abu Khdeir, 16, was murdered shortly after the bodies of three Israeli teens - Gil-Ad Shaer, Naftali Frenkel and Eyal Yifrach - were discovered after they were kidnapped and murdered near Hebron.
The accused, 30-year-old Yosef Ben-David and two minors, kidnapped Abu Khdeir from the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat and burned him alive at the Jerusalem Forest. Hussein said that since the murder early on the morning of July 2, 2014, members of the family have been in a bad state. "Mohammed's mother, his brothers and sisters, and I, can't stop experiencing hardships. Our entire life is gone. We have mental problems in the family since it happened," he said.
"I don't forget for a moment that at court, my son's murderers look at me and laugh and enjoy themselves. How would you feel if someone burned your son alive and smiled at court? It made me and his mother sick. We can't leave the house. Every night I think about how he was burned," he added.
Mohammed Abu Khdeir removed from terror memorial after family's request
Palestinian teen, who was burned alive by Jewish settlers, was added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl; 'This is a great initiative to honor my son, but I'm more interested in justice,' says father.
The National Insurance Institute removed the name of Mohammed Abu Khdeir from the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl on Tuesday, following a request by his family. The Khdeir family made their request earlier in the day after discovering the addition of the name from media outlets.
Israel Radio reported on Tuesday morning that the name of Khdeir, the Palestinian teenager from East Jerusalem who was kidnapped and murdered by Jewish settlers last summer, was added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl,.
His name was also added to the list of terror victims in the government-run website. The Defense Ministry recognized Abu Khdeir as a victim of "hostile action" in July, some two weeks after he was murdered.
Hussein Abu Khdeir, Mohammed's father, told Ynet that "this is a great initiative meant to honor my son, but I'm more interested with something else entirely: For the court to do justice with those who burned my son alive, and sentence them to the appropriate punishment." Hussein was referring to the fact defense lawyers for some of the accused plan to claim their clients are mentally unfit to stand trial.
"My son is gone, my son was burned and we were burned with him. I want justice and not honor. What good is it going to do me if they carve his name in stone?" Hussein said. Mohammed Abu Khdeir, 16, was murdered shortly after the bodies of three Israeli teens - Gil-Ad Shaer, Naftali Frenkel and Eyal Yifrach - were discovered after they were kidnapped and murdered near Hebron.
The accused, 30-year-old Yosef Ben-David and two minors, kidnapped Abu Khdeir from the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat and burned him alive at the Jerusalem Forest. Hussein said that since the murder early on the morning of July 2, 2014, members of the family have been in a bad state. "Mohammed's mother, his brothers and sisters, and I, can't stop experiencing hardships. Our entire life is gone. We have mental problems in the family since it happened," he said.
"I don't forget for a moment that at court, my son's murderers look at me and laugh and enjoy themselves. How would you feel if someone burned your son alive and smiled at court? It made me and his mother sick. We can't leave the house. Every night I think about how he was burned," he added.
Mohammed Abu Khdeir, the Palestinian teenager from East Jerusalem who was kidnapped and murdered by Jewish settlers last summer, has been added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl, Israel Radio reported on Tuesday morning.
His name was also added to the list of terror victims in the government-run website. The Defense Ministry recognized Abu Khdeir as a victim of "hostile action" in July, some two weeks after he was murdered.
Hussein Abu Khdeir, Mohammed's father, told Ynet that "this is a great initiative meant to honor my son, but I'm more interested with something else entirely: For the court to do justice with those who burned my son alive, and sentence them to the appropriate punishment." Hussein was referring to the fact defense lawyers for some of the accused plan to claim their clients are mentally unfit to stand trial.
"My son is gone, my son was burned and we were burned with him. I want justice and not honor. What good is it going to do me if they carve his name in stone?" Hussein said. Mohammed Abu Khdeir, 16, was murdered shortly after the bodies of three Israeli teens - Gil-Ad Shaer, Naftali Frenkel and Eyal Yifrach - were discovered after they were kidnapped and murdered near Hebron.
The accused, 30-year-old Yosef Ben-David and two minors, kidnapped Abu Khdeir from the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat and burned him alive at the Jerusalem Forest. Hussein said that since the murder early on the morning of July 2, 2014, members of the family have been in a bad state. "Mohammed's mother, his brothers and sisters, and I, can't stop experiencing hardships. Our entire life is gone. We have mental problems in the family since it happened," he said.
"I don't forget for a moment that at court, my son's murderers look at me and laugh and enjoy themselves. How would you feel if someone burned your son alive and smiled at court? It made me and his mother sick. We can't leave the house. Every night I think about how he was burned," he added.
Mohammed Abu Khdeir removed from terror memorial after family's request
Palestinian teen, who was burned alive by Jewish settlers, was added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl; 'This is a great initiative to honor my son, but I'm more interested in justice,' says father.
The National Insurance Institute removed the name of Mohammed Abu Khdeir from the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl on Tuesday, following a request by his family. The Khdeir family made their request earlier in the day after discovering the addition of the name from media outlets.
Israel Radio reported on Tuesday morning that the name of Khdeir, the Palestinian teenager from East Jerusalem who was kidnapped and murdered by Jewish settlers last summer, was added to the Victims of Acts of Terror Memorial at Mount Herzl,.
His name was also added to the list of terror victims in the government-run website. The Defense Ministry recognized Abu Khdeir as a victim of "hostile action" in July, some two weeks after he was murdered.
Hussein Abu Khdeir, Mohammed's father, told Ynet that "this is a great initiative meant to honor my son, but I'm more interested with something else entirely: For the court to do justice with those who burned my son alive, and sentence them to the appropriate punishment." Hussein was referring to the fact defense lawyers for some of the accused plan to claim their clients are mentally unfit to stand trial.
"My son is gone, my son was burned and we were burned with him. I want justice and not honor. What good is it going to do me if they carve his name in stone?" Hussein said. Mohammed Abu Khdeir, 16, was murdered shortly after the bodies of three Israeli teens - Gil-Ad Shaer, Naftali Frenkel and Eyal Yifrach - were discovered after they were kidnapped and murdered near Hebron.
The accused, 30-year-old Yosef Ben-David and two minors, kidnapped Abu Khdeir from the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat and burned him alive at the Jerusalem Forest. Hussein said that since the murder early on the morning of July 2, 2014, members of the family have been in a bad state. "Mohammed's mother, his brothers and sisters, and I, can't stop experiencing hardships. Our entire life is gone. We have mental problems in the family since it happened," he said.
"I don't forget for a moment that at court, my son's murderers look at me and laugh and enjoy themselves. How would you feel if someone burned your son alive and smiled at court? It made me and his mother sick. We can't leave the house. Every night I think about how he was burned," he added.
20 apr 2015
Samir ‘Awad being evacuated from the scene after being shot.
Israeli State Attorney: 'Awad's killing merely “reckless and negligent”
On the 5th of January, 2013, sixteen-year-old Samir ‘Awad was killed by Israeli soldiers near the apartheid wall in the occupied West Bank village of Budrus.
According to Israeli-based human rights group, B'Tselem, Samir was shot three times, although he posed no danger to anyone.
That morning, following his last examination before school’s mid-year break, Samir went with a few friends to the walled area south-west of Budrus, about 300 meters from the school. B’Tselem field researcher Iyad Hadad gathered testimony from several of the teenagers, one of whom watched from a distance. According to their testimonies, the boys planned to throw stones at military patrols along the fence, as teenagers in the area often do. They said that when they approached the wall, they saw that one of its gates was open. They thought that, because of this, soldiers must be nearby and tried to find them.
The wall is made up of a primary fence, with secondary rows of barbed wire around it. The barbed wire is meant to prevent access to the primary fence, but, near Budrus, there are several openings in the wire. One boy went through a makeshift opening in the first fence, saw nothing, and came back out. Samir then went through the opening alone, and continued on to the primary fence.
Military sources told the media that Israeli soldiers of the 71st Armored Corps Battalion were concealed in a nearby ambush. B’Tselem’s inquiry showed that the soldiers were on the side of the wall area facing Budrus. According to B’Tselem, when Samir was between the barbed-wire fence and the main fence, four soldiers appeared and the other teenagers fled the scene.
At this point, Samir tried to run away, apparently, but was caught between the two fences. The soldiers called for him to stop and fired in the air. Then they shot at his leg while he was trying to flee. He was wounded and fell to the ground, but, when he tried to continue running, the soldiers shot him again. He was wounded by a bullet in the back and a bullet to the head.
According to Hebrew media reports, the initial investigation by the Israeli military found that ‘Awad was shot in contravention of open-fire regulations, which permit soldiers to use live ammunition only in cases of real and immediate mortal danger.
The reports also stated that there were contradictions among the soldiers’ stories.
The Military Police Investigations Unit has long since completed all aspects of the investigation into the incident, yet, although more than two years have now passed since then, only recently was a decision reached in regard to the case.
On Tuesday, April 14, the Israeli State Attorney’s Office notified the High Court of Justice (HCJ) that, in the case of Palestinian youth Samir ‘Awad, it had decided (“subject to a hearing and to the end of privilege proceedings”) to file an indictment for the minor offense of committing “a reckless and negligent act using a firearm”.
Furthermore, the state’s response did not note which of the soldiers involved was to stand trial.
This is a new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for the lives of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, B'Tselem further reports. The State Attorney’s Office has sent security forces in the Occupied Territories a clear message: if you kill an unarmed Palestinian who poses no threat, we will do everything to cover it up and ensure impunity. Killing a wounded, fleeing youth who posed no threat by shooting him in the back is not a “reckless and negligent act”.
The disparity between the grave action and the minor offense is incomprehensible and outrageous.
It is also not clear why it took two years and a petition to the HCJ for the authorities to decide to serve this indictment. B'Tselem asks: Had the petition not been filed, would the Military Advocate General’s (MAG’s) Corps have continued to drag its feet? When, exactly, were the authorities planning to end this sorry affair?
See also: 02/02/15 Hit and Run on B'Tselem Photographer in Hebron
Israeli State Attorney: 'Awad's killing merely “reckless and negligent”
On the 5th of January, 2013, sixteen-year-old Samir ‘Awad was killed by Israeli soldiers near the apartheid wall in the occupied West Bank village of Budrus.
According to Israeli-based human rights group, B'Tselem, Samir was shot three times, although he posed no danger to anyone.
That morning, following his last examination before school’s mid-year break, Samir went with a few friends to the walled area south-west of Budrus, about 300 meters from the school. B’Tselem field researcher Iyad Hadad gathered testimony from several of the teenagers, one of whom watched from a distance. According to their testimonies, the boys planned to throw stones at military patrols along the fence, as teenagers in the area often do. They said that when they approached the wall, they saw that one of its gates was open. They thought that, because of this, soldiers must be nearby and tried to find them.
The wall is made up of a primary fence, with secondary rows of barbed wire around it. The barbed wire is meant to prevent access to the primary fence, but, near Budrus, there are several openings in the wire. One boy went through a makeshift opening in the first fence, saw nothing, and came back out. Samir then went through the opening alone, and continued on to the primary fence.
Military sources told the media that Israeli soldiers of the 71st Armored Corps Battalion were concealed in a nearby ambush. B’Tselem’s inquiry showed that the soldiers were on the side of the wall area facing Budrus. According to B’Tselem, when Samir was between the barbed-wire fence and the main fence, four soldiers appeared and the other teenagers fled the scene.
At this point, Samir tried to run away, apparently, but was caught between the two fences. The soldiers called for him to stop and fired in the air. Then they shot at his leg while he was trying to flee. He was wounded and fell to the ground, but, when he tried to continue running, the soldiers shot him again. He was wounded by a bullet in the back and a bullet to the head.
According to Hebrew media reports, the initial investigation by the Israeli military found that ‘Awad was shot in contravention of open-fire regulations, which permit soldiers to use live ammunition only in cases of real and immediate mortal danger.
The reports also stated that there were contradictions among the soldiers’ stories.
The Military Police Investigations Unit has long since completed all aspects of the investigation into the incident, yet, although more than two years have now passed since then, only recently was a decision reached in regard to the case.
On Tuesday, April 14, the Israeli State Attorney’s Office notified the High Court of Justice (HCJ) that, in the case of Palestinian youth Samir ‘Awad, it had decided (“subject to a hearing and to the end of privilege proceedings”) to file an indictment for the minor offense of committing “a reckless and negligent act using a firearm”.
Furthermore, the state’s response did not note which of the soldiers involved was to stand trial.
This is a new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for the lives of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, B'Tselem further reports. The State Attorney’s Office has sent security forces in the Occupied Territories a clear message: if you kill an unarmed Palestinian who poses no threat, we will do everything to cover it up and ensure impunity. Killing a wounded, fleeing youth who posed no threat by shooting him in the back is not a “reckless and negligent act”.
The disparity between the grave action and the minor offense is incomprehensible and outrageous.
It is also not clear why it took two years and a petition to the HCJ for the authorities to decide to serve this indictment. B'Tselem asks: Had the petition not been filed, would the Military Advocate General’s (MAG’s) Corps have continued to drag its feet? When, exactly, were the authorities planning to end this sorry affair?
See also: 02/02/15 Hit and Run on B'Tselem Photographer in Hebron
18 apr 2015
The Israeli Supreme Court has approved the application of a law allowing the Israeli state to seize property in East Jerusalem whose owners live in the West Bank or Gaza, in a move slammed by Palestinian officials.
A panel of seven judges approved application of the "Absentee Property Law" in East Jerusalem, despite warning that it presents many problems and should be used only in the "rarest of rare cases," Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported on Thursday.
Senior PLO official Ahmad Queri decried the decision, saying the law was based on racial discrimination and was aimed at removing Palestinians from Jerusalem. He said it would lead to an exclusively Jewish Jerusalem.
Ma'an further reports that this questionable Israeli law was enacted in 1950 in the aftermath of the violent expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians, and allowed the newly created Israeli state to seize Palestinian property within its boundaries.
Following the Six Day War in 1967, Israeli municipal boundaries were extended to include East Jerusalem in contravention of international law, meaning that Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza with property in East Jerusalem were suddenly considered "absentee" owners under Israeli law.
Right-wing Israelis seeking to increase the Jewish presence in East Jerusalem have been using the law to seize property in East Jerusalem for a number of years, Haaretz reported.
The property is transferred to Israel's Custodian of Absentee Property, which then rents them out to right-wing Jewish families.
The Supreme Court's ruling on Thursday came in response to a growing number of appeals filed by Palestinians who had lost their property under the law.
The ruling effectively rejected the Palestinian appeals and legalized application of the law throughout East Jerusalem.
PLO official Queri said the decision was in blatant defiance of the international community and allowed for the illegal confiscation of Palestinians' property in the city.
'Running away from responsibility'
The Supreme Court made the approval despite expressing a number of misgivings.
Supreme Court President Asher Grunis wrote that the law considers Palestinians with property in East Jerusalem "absentees," "not because of any act taken on their part, but because of the transfer of control in Jerusalem to Israeli hands and the application of Israeli law there," Haaretz reported.
He said that property owners in the West Bank and Gaza do not live "under the control of other countries," but "in territories in which Israel has control -- to some extent -- over.”
Supreme Court President Miriam Naor went further, saying that although application of the law is legal, she doubts a case could be found in which the law could be applied in practice, Haaretz reported.
Grunis also noted that if taken literally, the law could be applied to Israelis living in illegal settlements across the West Bank who own property inside Israel and East Jerusalem.
Avigdor Feldman, a lawyer representing one of the Palestinian appellants, said that the Supreme Court was "running away from responsibility," Haaretz reported.
He said: "The justices demonstrated a very formalistic approach. They determined that (the law) is not proper, but have passed the buck to the courts, attorney general and the Custodian. They have asked to trust the generosity of the state not to make use of (the law)."
Feldman added: "It is clear that the law was created during a different situation and for other purposes, and is not appropriate for the present circumstances.”
The decision has been blasted by Palestinian officials, PA news agency Wafa reported.
In addition to scathing remarks from the PLO, Hanna Issa, Secretary-General of the Islamic-Christian Committee to Support Occupied Jerusalem and Holy Sites, denounced the court ruling.
He said Israel has no right to seize property belonging to "Palestinian residents who were forced out of their homeland."
There are now believed to be more than 300,000 Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem.
The international community views East Jerusalem as part of the Palestinian territories and recognizes the annexation and settlement programs as illegal under international law.
A panel of seven judges approved application of the "Absentee Property Law" in East Jerusalem, despite warning that it presents many problems and should be used only in the "rarest of rare cases," Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported on Thursday.
Senior PLO official Ahmad Queri decried the decision, saying the law was based on racial discrimination and was aimed at removing Palestinians from Jerusalem. He said it would lead to an exclusively Jewish Jerusalem.
Ma'an further reports that this questionable Israeli law was enacted in 1950 in the aftermath of the violent expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians, and allowed the newly created Israeli state to seize Palestinian property within its boundaries.
Following the Six Day War in 1967, Israeli municipal boundaries were extended to include East Jerusalem in contravention of international law, meaning that Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza with property in East Jerusalem were suddenly considered "absentee" owners under Israeli law.
Right-wing Israelis seeking to increase the Jewish presence in East Jerusalem have been using the law to seize property in East Jerusalem for a number of years, Haaretz reported.
The property is transferred to Israel's Custodian of Absentee Property, which then rents them out to right-wing Jewish families.
The Supreme Court's ruling on Thursday came in response to a growing number of appeals filed by Palestinians who had lost their property under the law.
The ruling effectively rejected the Palestinian appeals and legalized application of the law throughout East Jerusalem.
PLO official Queri said the decision was in blatant defiance of the international community and allowed for the illegal confiscation of Palestinians' property in the city.
'Running away from responsibility'
The Supreme Court made the approval despite expressing a number of misgivings.
Supreme Court President Asher Grunis wrote that the law considers Palestinians with property in East Jerusalem "absentees," "not because of any act taken on their part, but because of the transfer of control in Jerusalem to Israeli hands and the application of Israeli law there," Haaretz reported.
He said that property owners in the West Bank and Gaza do not live "under the control of other countries," but "in territories in which Israel has control -- to some extent -- over.”
Supreme Court President Miriam Naor went further, saying that although application of the law is legal, she doubts a case could be found in which the law could be applied in practice, Haaretz reported.
Grunis also noted that if taken literally, the law could be applied to Israelis living in illegal settlements across the West Bank who own property inside Israel and East Jerusalem.
Avigdor Feldman, a lawyer representing one of the Palestinian appellants, said that the Supreme Court was "running away from responsibility," Haaretz reported.
He said: "The justices demonstrated a very formalistic approach. They determined that (the law) is not proper, but have passed the buck to the courts, attorney general and the Custodian. They have asked to trust the generosity of the state not to make use of (the law)."
Feldman added: "It is clear that the law was created during a different situation and for other purposes, and is not appropriate for the present circumstances.”
The decision has been blasted by Palestinian officials, PA news agency Wafa reported.
In addition to scathing remarks from the PLO, Hanna Issa, Secretary-General of the Islamic-Christian Committee to Support Occupied Jerusalem and Holy Sites, denounced the court ruling.
He said Israel has no right to seize property belonging to "Palestinian residents who were forced out of their homeland."
There are now believed to be more than 300,000 Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem.
The international community views East Jerusalem as part of the Palestinian territories and recognizes the annexation and settlement programs as illegal under international law.
17 apr 2015
The family of Khaled Zuheir Qutteineh denied the claims of the occupation police and the Israeli media that the accident Khaled had was deliberate on a terrorist background.
The occupation forces along with Israeli Intelligence raided and searched Qutteineh family house in the neighborhood of “Dahyet Al-Salam” and confiscated a computer and a cell phone.
The Intelligence interrogated Khaled’s wife and called Khaled’s parents and his brother Mohammad for interrogation on Thursday night.
Khaled’s wife said that her husband left the house on Wednesday night to drop off his parents to their house in the Old City concurrently with the heavy rainfall the city of Jerusalem witnesses.
She added: “What happened with Khaled is a normal accident because of the bad weather conditions. I only found out about this morning from my mother-in-law and I was surprised especially because my husband doesn’t have any political interests and he does not even watch the news.”
Qutteineh got married last November and they are expecting their first baby in the new few months.
She explained that her husband has been working in cleaning the mosques in the neighborhood of Ras Shihadeh in Anata for several months.
The accident occurred on Wednesday night after Khaled lost control of his vehicle in the area of Mount Scopus in Street Number 1 and seriously injured two Israeli; note that one of them was announced deal on Thursday night.
The Israeli police said that they are still investigating the incident and added in a statement they issued on Thursday afternoon: “with the initial investigations and data collection, the police suggest that the incident was most likely carried out on national background suspicious and the police are still investigating the incident and considering all options.”
The occupation forces along with Israeli Intelligence raided and searched Qutteineh family house in the neighborhood of “Dahyet Al-Salam” and confiscated a computer and a cell phone.
The Intelligence interrogated Khaled’s wife and called Khaled’s parents and his brother Mohammad for interrogation on Thursday night.
Khaled’s wife said that her husband left the house on Wednesday night to drop off his parents to their house in the Old City concurrently with the heavy rainfall the city of Jerusalem witnesses.
She added: “What happened with Khaled is a normal accident because of the bad weather conditions. I only found out about this morning from my mother-in-law and I was surprised especially because my husband doesn’t have any political interests and he does not even watch the news.”
Qutteineh got married last November and they are expecting their first baby in the new few months.
She explained that her husband has been working in cleaning the mosques in the neighborhood of Ras Shihadeh in Anata for several months.
The accident occurred on Wednesday night after Khaled lost control of his vehicle in the area of Mount Scopus in Street Number 1 and seriously injured two Israeli; note that one of them was announced deal on Thursday night.
The Israeli police said that they are still investigating the incident and added in a statement they issued on Thursday afternoon: “with the initial investigations and data collection, the police suggest that the incident was most likely carried out on national background suspicious and the police are still investigating the incident and considering all options.”
Adv. Gaby Lasky: “Rejection of the appeal against the boycott law changes the basic constitutional rules in Israel. Boycott of cottage cheese is allowed, but not if it settler-made cottage cheese” .
On April 15th the Supreme Court in Jerusalem rejected the appeal against the “Anti Boycott Law” which was lodged by former Knesset Member Uri Avnery, Gush Shalom and other Israeli peace and human rights groups, and keeping in force the law enacted several years by the right-wing majority in the Knesset - criminalizing any call for a boycott of Israel and defining a boycott of settlement products as also being “a boycott of Israel”.
"This is a deplorable ruling with far-reaching implications” said Adv. Gaby Lasky, who represented Gush Shalom in this appeal. “The Justices effectively changed the basic Israeli constitutional law as we had known them, giving the interest of maintaining settlements in the Occupied Territories a precedence over the fundamental right of all citizens to Freedom of Political Expression. In fact, the Supreme Court has been captured by the political precepts of anti-democratic right wingers, giving its stamp of approval to a piece of legislation designed to gag one side of the political spectrum. "
Lasky went on to say: "This is a ruling which should have been simple and straightforward. The court should have come down on the side of the Freedom of Expression - especially since the Supreme Court itself had previously laid down clear limits on what are the grounds for infringing that basic freedom. A clear and present threat to public order or national security, and a prohibition upon explicit calls for violence or racism – hitherto, these were the sole grounds which might justify an infringement of Freedom of Expression. With the new ruling, the court gave in to an oppressive parliamentary majority, which invented new and unacceptable grounds for striking at the Freedom of Expression.
"Under the legal situation created in the State of Israel by the Anti Boycott Law and now ratified by the Supreme Court, it is acceptable to call for a boycott of cottage cheese due to its high price - but absolutely forbidden to call for a boycott of the same cheese because it is produced in a settlement" said Lasky. (The reference is to the “Cottage Cheese Boycott Campaign” which had touched off the mass Social Protest Movement in 2011 Israel).
Gush Shalom, the Israeli Peace Bloc, which had been the first to lodge the above appeal, expressed its disappointment with the deplorable ruling, which keeps in place the ban imposed by the right-wing majority in the Knesset – making any citizen or group calling for the boycott of settlements and their products liable to severe penalties. The Supreme Court’s ruling is particularly disturbing and ominous at this juncture – exactly when the agenda of Netanyahu’s talks with the extreme-right parties on forming a new governing coalition includes proposals for new draconian measures, aimed at dealing devastating blows to the Supreme Court itself as well as to the Freedom of Expression and Assembly in Israel.
It is unacceptable to have a law which states that “a boycott of an Israeli-controlled territory” is tantamount to a boycott of Israel itself. There is an essential difference between the legitimate sovereign territory of Israel and the territories occupied in 1967 - which are not a part of Israel under International Law, nor indeed under Israel’s own laws. The building of settlements in the Occupied Territories is a violation of International Law. The main purpose for which these settlements are established is to make it impossible for the Palestinians to ever create their own independent state - thereby also making it impossible for Israel’s citizens to ever reach peace with their neighbors.
It is the right of those who oppose the settlements not to consume the products produced there, not to fund with their money to a settlement project to which they are strongly opposed. It is the right of activists to make a loud and clear call for a boycott of settlement products. It is the right of such organizations as Gush Shalom to compile a detailed list of settlement products, post it for the broadest public view, spread it at the entrances to supermarkets and call upon customers not to consume the products appearing on it. Also at the present moment, in the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling, we reiterate and reaffirm our view that this right is valid. In recent years, Gush Shalom had been forced to conduct activities with the Anti Boycott Law as a Damocles’ Sword ever hanging overhead. We are sorry to find the Justices ruling that this sword would continue to hanging over our heads.
It should be noted that, regardless of the whatever any of us does or desires, the global movement to boycott Israel (BDS) is gathering an increasing momentum, due to the policy of occupation and oppression enacted by the government of Israel. Many people around the world - including many Jews – have come to feel that Israel's actions in recent years justify the imposition of a boycott. The only real way for Israel to deal with this boycott campaign is to change its policy in the Occupied Territories, which pours ever more fuel on the boycott conflagration.
Most such boycotters are abroad, out of reach of the Israeli law. Punitive measures against those who are subject to Israeli law would do nothing but exacerbate the situation.
On April 15th the Supreme Court in Jerusalem rejected the appeal against the “Anti Boycott Law” which was lodged by former Knesset Member Uri Avnery, Gush Shalom and other Israeli peace and human rights groups, and keeping in force the law enacted several years by the right-wing majority in the Knesset - criminalizing any call for a boycott of Israel and defining a boycott of settlement products as also being “a boycott of Israel”.
"This is a deplorable ruling with far-reaching implications” said Adv. Gaby Lasky, who represented Gush Shalom in this appeal. “The Justices effectively changed the basic Israeli constitutional law as we had known them, giving the interest of maintaining settlements in the Occupied Territories a precedence over the fundamental right of all citizens to Freedom of Political Expression. In fact, the Supreme Court has been captured by the political precepts of anti-democratic right wingers, giving its stamp of approval to a piece of legislation designed to gag one side of the political spectrum. "
Lasky went on to say: "This is a ruling which should have been simple and straightforward. The court should have come down on the side of the Freedom of Expression - especially since the Supreme Court itself had previously laid down clear limits on what are the grounds for infringing that basic freedom. A clear and present threat to public order or national security, and a prohibition upon explicit calls for violence or racism – hitherto, these were the sole grounds which might justify an infringement of Freedom of Expression. With the new ruling, the court gave in to an oppressive parliamentary majority, which invented new and unacceptable grounds for striking at the Freedom of Expression.
"Under the legal situation created in the State of Israel by the Anti Boycott Law and now ratified by the Supreme Court, it is acceptable to call for a boycott of cottage cheese due to its high price - but absolutely forbidden to call for a boycott of the same cheese because it is produced in a settlement" said Lasky. (The reference is to the “Cottage Cheese Boycott Campaign” which had touched off the mass Social Protest Movement in 2011 Israel).
Gush Shalom, the Israeli Peace Bloc, which had been the first to lodge the above appeal, expressed its disappointment with the deplorable ruling, which keeps in place the ban imposed by the right-wing majority in the Knesset – making any citizen or group calling for the boycott of settlements and their products liable to severe penalties. The Supreme Court’s ruling is particularly disturbing and ominous at this juncture – exactly when the agenda of Netanyahu’s talks with the extreme-right parties on forming a new governing coalition includes proposals for new draconian measures, aimed at dealing devastating blows to the Supreme Court itself as well as to the Freedom of Expression and Assembly in Israel.
It is unacceptable to have a law which states that “a boycott of an Israeli-controlled territory” is tantamount to a boycott of Israel itself. There is an essential difference between the legitimate sovereign territory of Israel and the territories occupied in 1967 - which are not a part of Israel under International Law, nor indeed under Israel’s own laws. The building of settlements in the Occupied Territories is a violation of International Law. The main purpose for which these settlements are established is to make it impossible for the Palestinians to ever create their own independent state - thereby also making it impossible for Israel’s citizens to ever reach peace with their neighbors.
It is the right of those who oppose the settlements not to consume the products produced there, not to fund with their money to a settlement project to which they are strongly opposed. It is the right of activists to make a loud and clear call for a boycott of settlement products. It is the right of such organizations as Gush Shalom to compile a detailed list of settlement products, post it for the broadest public view, spread it at the entrances to supermarkets and call upon customers not to consume the products appearing on it. Also at the present moment, in the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling, we reiterate and reaffirm our view that this right is valid. In recent years, Gush Shalom had been forced to conduct activities with the Anti Boycott Law as a Damocles’ Sword ever hanging overhead. We are sorry to find the Justices ruling that this sword would continue to hanging over our heads.
It should be noted that, regardless of the whatever any of us does or desires, the global movement to boycott Israel (BDS) is gathering an increasing momentum, due to the policy of occupation and oppression enacted by the government of Israel. Many people around the world - including many Jews – have come to feel that Israel's actions in recent years justify the imposition of a boycott. The only real way for Israel to deal with this boycott campaign is to change its policy in the Occupied Territories, which pours ever more fuel on the boycott conflagration.
Most such boycotters are abroad, out of reach of the Israeli law. Punitive measures against those who are subject to Israeli law would do nothing but exacerbate the situation.
16 apr 2015
The Israeli high court on Thursday issued an order allowing the execution of the absentee property law in the Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem.
According to the court verdict, the state should confiscate Palestinian property in Jerusalem belonging Arabs only under extreme conditions and only with the permission of the state comptroller.
The court made its decision following a series of appeals that have been filed by Palestinian residents and human rights groups against the confiscation of their homes and property in the holy city.
The decision is considered part of Israeli steps aimed at Judaizing the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem.
The Absentee property law (1950) is one of Israel’s major legal instruments for seizing Palestinian property.
The law has served to confiscate the land and real estate left behind by the Palestinians who were forcibly displaced in 1948. It is still in effect and used to confiscate Palestinian properties more than six decades later.
The law violates international law and has been strongly condemned by the UN.
According to the court verdict, the state should confiscate Palestinian property in Jerusalem belonging Arabs only under extreme conditions and only with the permission of the state comptroller.
The court made its decision following a series of appeals that have been filed by Palestinian residents and human rights groups against the confiscation of their homes and property in the holy city.
The decision is considered part of Israeli steps aimed at Judaizing the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem.
The Absentee property law (1950) is one of Israel’s major legal instruments for seizing Palestinian property.
The law has served to confiscate the land and real estate left behind by the Palestinians who were forcibly displaced in 1948. It is still in effect and used to confiscate Palestinian properties more than six decades later.
The law violates international law and has been strongly condemned by the UN.
15 apr 2015
A large Israeli military force broke into a number of neighborhoods in the southern West Bank city of al-Khalil on Wednesday. No arrests were reported during the raid.
The Israeli troops were deployed in big numbers at the northern entrance to the governorate and the main road linking between the city and neighboring town of Halhul, local sources said.
On the other hand, dozens of settlers gathered Tuesday evening in the city as a prelude to re-build a synagogue to the south of the city at the expanse of local residents’ lands.
The synagogue was earlier destroyed after the Israeli Supreme Court ordered its demolition for being established on a Palestinian local family’s private land in an effort to force them off.
Despite the court’s demolition order, settlers of Kiryat Arba tried more than once to rebuild the synagogue under Israeli forces’ protection.
The Israeli troops were deployed in big numbers at the northern entrance to the governorate and the main road linking between the city and neighboring town of Halhul, local sources said.
On the other hand, dozens of settlers gathered Tuesday evening in the city as a prelude to re-build a synagogue to the south of the city at the expanse of local residents’ lands.
The synagogue was earlier destroyed after the Israeli Supreme Court ordered its demolition for being established on a Palestinian local family’s private land in an effort to force them off.
Despite the court’s demolition order, settlers of Kiryat Arba tried more than once to rebuild the synagogue under Israeli forces’ protection.
14 apr 2015
Samir ‘Awad 16
B’Tselem: new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for lives of Palestinians in Occupied Territories
Today Israel’s State Attorney’s Office notified the High Court of Justice [PDF] (HCJ) that in the case of Palestinian youth Samir ‘Awad it had decided, “subject to a hearing and to the end of privilege proceedings”, to file an indictment for the minor offense of committing “a reckless and negligent act using a firearm”. The State’s response did not note which of the soldiers involved was to stand trial.
This is a new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for the lives of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. The State Attorney’s Office has sent security forces in the Occupied Territories a clear message: if you kill an unarmed Palestinian who poses no threat, we will do everything to cover it up and ensure impunity.
Killing a wounded, fleeing youth who posed no threat by shooting him in the back is not a “reckless and negligent act”. The disparity between the grave action and the minor offense is incomprehensible and outrageous.
It is also not clear why it took two years and a petition to the HCJ for the authorities to decide to serve this indictment. Had the petition not been filed, would the Military Advocate General’s (MAG’s) Corps have continued to drag its feet? When, exactly, were the authorities planning to end this sorry affair?
Sixteen-year-old Samir ‘Awad was killed in January 2013 by soldiers close to the Separation Barrier in the West Bank village of Budrus. He was shot in the back although he posed no danger to anyone. The Military Police Investigations Unit (MPIU) has long since completed all aspects of the investigation into the incident, yet although more than two years have passed since then, no decision was reached until today.
The boy’s father, Ahmad ‘Awad, petitioned the HCJ together with B’Tselem a little over a year ago, in March 2014, to have the MAG decide whether to indict the soldiers who killed his son or close the case file.
B’Tselem: new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for lives of Palestinians in Occupied Territories
Today Israel’s State Attorney’s Office notified the High Court of Justice [PDF] (HCJ) that in the case of Palestinian youth Samir ‘Awad it had decided, “subject to a hearing and to the end of privilege proceedings”, to file an indictment for the minor offense of committing “a reckless and negligent act using a firearm”. The State’s response did not note which of the soldiers involved was to stand trial.
This is a new low in Israeli authorities’ disregard for the lives of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. The State Attorney’s Office has sent security forces in the Occupied Territories a clear message: if you kill an unarmed Palestinian who poses no threat, we will do everything to cover it up and ensure impunity.
Killing a wounded, fleeing youth who posed no threat by shooting him in the back is not a “reckless and negligent act”. The disparity between the grave action and the minor offense is incomprehensible and outrageous.
It is also not clear why it took two years and a petition to the HCJ for the authorities to decide to serve this indictment. Had the petition not been filed, would the Military Advocate General’s (MAG’s) Corps have continued to drag its feet? When, exactly, were the authorities planning to end this sorry affair?
Sixteen-year-old Samir ‘Awad was killed in January 2013 by soldiers close to the Separation Barrier in the West Bank village of Budrus. He was shot in the back although he posed no danger to anyone. The Military Police Investigations Unit (MPIU) has long since completed all aspects of the investigation into the incident, yet although more than two years have passed since then, no decision was reached until today.
The boy’s father, Ahmad ‘Awad, petitioned the HCJ together with B’Tselem a little over a year ago, in March 2014, to have the MAG decide whether to indict the soldiers who killed his son or close the case file.
A day after being hospitalized for heart issues upon his arrival to Israel from the US, Rabbi Pinto pleads guilty to bribery and obstruction of justice as part of plea bargain for lighter sentence.
Celebrity Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto pleaded guilty Tuesday morning to charges of bribery at the Tel Aviv District Court, to which he arrived directly from the Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv, where he had been hospitalized immediately upon landing in Israel from the United States.
At the beginning of the hearing, the rabbi said: "My lawyers have read to me the indictment and yes, I admit it."
As part of a plea bargain, Rabbi Pinto admitted to the charges of bribery, attempted bribery and obstruction of justice. The rabbi will serve a lighter term in exchange for his testimony against a high-ranking police officer, Superintendent Efraim Bracha, who has been accused of accepting bribes from Pinto. Before his arrival to the court house, to which he arrived 20 minutes late, various versions of the rabbi's medical condition were reported. Pinto arrived in Israel on Monday and complained of chest pains during the flight over from the United States.
At the Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv, medical sources said that the examinations, which included a cardiac catheterization, showed Pinto had suffered from a serious heart problem and his family claimed that he had a blocked artery. Meanwhile, doctors said that he did not suffer from a coronary.
As requested by the prosecution, the judge in the case, Oded Modrik, filed a stay of exit order to ensure Pinto would not be able to leave Israel. On Tuesday, the court ordered Pinto to surrender his passport. Pinto agreed to testify against former head of the police's Lahav 443 anti-fraud unit Menashe Arbiv last September as part of a formal plea bargain with the state prosecutor. Arbiv was suspected of receiving benefits from businessman close to Rabbi Pinto. In exchange for the testimony, Pinto was promised a light jail sentence of a year in prison.
Associates of Rabbi Pinto had passed on information to Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to try to make a deal: Pinto would provide testimony that would incriminate Arbiv in exchange for the cancellation of the indictment against him and also the investigation into one of the charities Pinto had headed.
The attorney general responded by filing an indictment against Pinto with charges which include bribing Superintendent Bracha in the amount of NIS 400,000 as well as for obstruction of justice. Bracha had notified his commanders of Pinto's request to bribe him and as per their order he continued to gather evidence against Pinto in the case.
Regarding sentencing, it was agreed Tuesday that the state would demand a one year prison sentence and an additional suspended sentence, fine and forfeiture of a significant amount of funds recovered.
Celebrity Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto pleaded guilty Tuesday morning to charges of bribery at the Tel Aviv District Court, to which he arrived directly from the Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv, where he had been hospitalized immediately upon landing in Israel from the United States.
At the beginning of the hearing, the rabbi said: "My lawyers have read to me the indictment and yes, I admit it."
As part of a plea bargain, Rabbi Pinto admitted to the charges of bribery, attempted bribery and obstruction of justice. The rabbi will serve a lighter term in exchange for his testimony against a high-ranking police officer, Superintendent Efraim Bracha, who has been accused of accepting bribes from Pinto. Before his arrival to the court house, to which he arrived 20 minutes late, various versions of the rabbi's medical condition were reported. Pinto arrived in Israel on Monday and complained of chest pains during the flight over from the United States.
At the Sourasky Medical Center in Tel Aviv, medical sources said that the examinations, which included a cardiac catheterization, showed Pinto had suffered from a serious heart problem and his family claimed that he had a blocked artery. Meanwhile, doctors said that he did not suffer from a coronary.
As requested by the prosecution, the judge in the case, Oded Modrik, filed a stay of exit order to ensure Pinto would not be able to leave Israel. On Tuesday, the court ordered Pinto to surrender his passport. Pinto agreed to testify against former head of the police's Lahav 443 anti-fraud unit Menashe Arbiv last September as part of a formal plea bargain with the state prosecutor. Arbiv was suspected of receiving benefits from businessman close to Rabbi Pinto. In exchange for the testimony, Pinto was promised a light jail sentence of a year in prison.
Associates of Rabbi Pinto had passed on information to Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to try to make a deal: Pinto would provide testimony that would incriminate Arbiv in exchange for the cancellation of the indictment against him and also the investigation into one of the charities Pinto had headed.
The attorney general responded by filing an indictment against Pinto with charges which include bribing Superintendent Bracha in the amount of NIS 400,000 as well as for obstruction of justice. Bracha had notified his commanders of Pinto's request to bribe him and as per their order he continued to gather evidence against Pinto in the case.
Regarding sentencing, it was agreed Tuesday that the state would demand a one year prison sentence and an additional suspended sentence, fine and forfeiture of a significant amount of funds recovered.
Site where Israeli teens set fire to Palestinian cafe
Despite declarations by Justice Ministry and prosecutors that they are determined to combat hate crime, recent plea bargain in case of 4 teens who set fire Palestinian cafe shows otherwise.
The Justice Ministry and state prosecutors have consistently declared that they are determined to combat the hate crime phenomenon known as "price tag" attacks, but a recent plea bargain accepted in the case of four teenage boys who were given a light sentence for setting fire to a Palestinian café indicates otherwise.
The Jerusalem District Court approved a plea bargain on Monday in the case of four teenage boys from Arad and the West Bank who admitted to setting fire to a Palestinian café near Hebron.
As part of the indictment, the prosecution had requested the teenagers receive a six-month sentence; however, the court sentenced them to three months of community service. The teens were arrested in September 2014 and investigators presented video footage which depicted the four teens running away with their faces covered after they set fire to a Palestinian café in the village of Dura, south of Hebron, and spray painted the word "revenge" on the front door of the establishment.
After their arrest, the four teens were charged with incitement and destruction of land with racist motives. According to the indictment, the teens had planned to damage the café ahead of time. It was also noted that they arrived at the scene with their faces covered, set fire to couches and armchairs and caused heavy damages to the electrical system and perimeter fence of the café. During the trial, the teens' attorneys argued that the act was done because the accused had suspected that residents of Dura had set fire to a entertainment complex in Beit El – a settlement in the central West Bank.
The parties then reached an agreement on a plea bargain in which the prosecution waived the initial charges of racism and destruction of land. Instead, it was agreed that the teens be charged with one count of arson and that they would only be sentenced to community service. The prosecution argued that the teens should be sentenced to six months of community service as they had sought revenge and because the act endangered life.
On the other hand, the teens' attorneys argued that the boys did not break the law but rather "were simply teens that had their hangout spot burned and decided to get revenge by burning a similar hang out spot in the village from which the accused thought the original arsons came from." The teens' attorneys also claimed that they did not pose a threat to anyone's life.
The judge, Shirly Renner, said that it was a serious offense that could cause high risk to human life and expressed her surprise as to why the boys chose that specific café while they did not know if the owner was involved in the arson at Beit El. On the other hand, the judge noted the teenagers' clean past and their admission.
In view of the plea bargain, the judge sentenced the boys to three months of community service, a year of probation and a fine of 500 shekels to be paid to the owners of the café they torched.
Despite declarations by Justice Ministry and prosecutors that they are determined to combat hate crime, recent plea bargain in case of 4 teens who set fire Palestinian cafe shows otherwise.
The Justice Ministry and state prosecutors have consistently declared that they are determined to combat the hate crime phenomenon known as "price tag" attacks, but a recent plea bargain accepted in the case of four teenage boys who were given a light sentence for setting fire to a Palestinian café indicates otherwise.
The Jerusalem District Court approved a plea bargain on Monday in the case of four teenage boys from Arad and the West Bank who admitted to setting fire to a Palestinian café near Hebron.
As part of the indictment, the prosecution had requested the teenagers receive a six-month sentence; however, the court sentenced them to three months of community service. The teens were arrested in September 2014 and investigators presented video footage which depicted the four teens running away with their faces covered after they set fire to a Palestinian café in the village of Dura, south of Hebron, and spray painted the word "revenge" on the front door of the establishment.
After their arrest, the four teens were charged with incitement and destruction of land with racist motives. According to the indictment, the teens had planned to damage the café ahead of time. It was also noted that they arrived at the scene with their faces covered, set fire to couches and armchairs and caused heavy damages to the electrical system and perimeter fence of the café. During the trial, the teens' attorneys argued that the act was done because the accused had suspected that residents of Dura had set fire to a entertainment complex in Beit El – a settlement in the central West Bank.
The parties then reached an agreement on a plea bargain in which the prosecution waived the initial charges of racism and destruction of land. Instead, it was agreed that the teens be charged with one count of arson and that they would only be sentenced to community service. The prosecution argued that the teens should be sentenced to six months of community service as they had sought revenge and because the act endangered life.
On the other hand, the teens' attorneys argued that the boys did not break the law but rather "were simply teens that had their hangout spot burned and decided to get revenge by burning a similar hang out spot in the village from which the accused thought the original arsons came from." The teens' attorneys also claimed that they did not pose a threat to anyone's life.
The judge, Shirly Renner, said that it was a serious offense that could cause high risk to human life and expressed her surprise as to why the boys chose that specific café while they did not know if the owner was involved in the arson at Beit El. On the other hand, the judge noted the teenagers' clean past and their admission.
In view of the plea bargain, the judge sentenced the boys to three months of community service, a year of probation and a fine of 500 shekels to be paid to the owners of the café they torched.
