Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Barred (from meeting with attorney), Membership/activity in unauthorized association
Translation: Marganit W.
Judge: Lieut. Col. Zeev Afik
Police Investigator: Nasib Safa
Attorney: Auda Zbeidi
Only one case heard today.
Bassel Hassan Faliyan – ID 401725957
Bassel has been in detention since 2.2.17.
For the last two weeks he has been held at Ohale Kedar, prevented from meeting with an attorney and interrogated by police plants who were very successful in their mission.
The police investigator requests 8 additional days.
Charges: membership in a proscribed organization, aiding and abetting that organization. Endangering security in the region.
The attorney asks the investigator to clarify the charges against her client.
A: The suspect was interrogated about his membership and services to Kutla Islamiya [Hamas student organization] at Beir-Zeit University.
Q: Any additional charges?
A: Not at this stage.
Q: Has he given a statement to the police?
Q: Was he interrogated by The SHABAK [GSS]?
Q: Did he tell them everything he knows about his activity?
A: There was significant development in his interrogation yesterday: he ties himself to the suspected activity.
Q: Will he be interrogated about his own activity or about that of others?
A: There is more to investigate. Yesterday, he was interrogated by the police and by the SHABAK. There’s progress.
Q: Did you check what progress was made before the police statement? Do you plan to confront him with others?
Q. [Refers to the secret file]
Q: Have others been arrested? Is there a plan to carry out other arrests?
A: No arrests yet. We would like them to be arrested soon.
During the entire hearing the judge made suggestions and provided the investigator with pieces of information.
Defense summation: the respondent links himself to the events, and acknowledge his activity as a student at Beir Zeit. He gave the names of other activists (while at Ohale Kedar and being barred from seeing counsel). One should separate this investigation of the detainee from investigation of other suspects. It is not his job to substantiate allegations against others, and he should not be remanded in custody as a hostage until the investigation of others is completed. The case should be transferred to the prosecution.
Judge’s decision: The detainee was born in 1996. He studies accounting and is a member of an unlawful organization. He was arrested based on extensive and confidential information. The judge believes that the investigation has dragged too long, but he cannot ignore the fact that significant progress was made yesterday. The learned attorney questioned the investigator but failed to convince me that the latter’s information is insignificant, seeing that the interrogation led to progress.
Based on the secret file I decide on an 8-day remand extension.