Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Stone Throwing, Holding and trading of combat materiel
Translation: Diana Rubanenko
Judge: Maj. Menachem Lieberman
Police investigator: Moshe Levy
Defence Attorneys: Maamoun Hashim, Firas Sabbah, Fahmi Shakirat, Aamer Yassin.
There are 7 cases in the docket.
Musaeb Awad Tzalah Abid – ID 918789702
Defence counsel: Att. Firas Sabbah
He was arrested on 12.1.11. The police is asking to extend his remand for another 12 days, for the purposes of the investigation.
The charges against the detainee are ‘membership and activity in a hostile organisation’.
The questions of the defence counsel are short - and the replies of the investigator are even shorter.
First question: Is the charge connected to his work? The detainee represents cellular phone company Cellcom in the Occupied Territories, and it seems that he's being mainly interrogated for transferring money to Gaza (although this does not appear explicitly on the charge sheet).
Reply: It’s in the confidential report.
We also learned that the charges are connected to a recent period, and are also in the category of military activity.
Defence counsel sums up: The suspect is accused of transferring money and providing a service. The suspect claims that everything that he did was performed lawfully. He deals in cellular phones, and as such he has financial matters connected with Gaza.
The detainee requested to specify that he has no security or criminal record. When a customer pays him, he doesn't ask where the money comes from.
He adds that he is a student.
The judge’s decision: There are serious accusations against the suspect. I learned from the file that there is room to extend his remand for another 12 days, for investigation’s purposes.
Hassin Amin Hassin Kalalwa – ID 939079554
Defence Counsel: Fahmi Shakirat
He was arrested on 25.12.10. The police asks for another 18 days.
The charges: ‘membership and activity in a hostile organisation, ‘holding combat materiel’, ‘abetting’.
Defence asks: Is it true that the suspect has linked himself to the Koran lessons he gives in the mosque? Does he link himself to ‘combat materiel’?
The reply: It’s in the confidential report.
Defence counsel specifies that the suspect says that he has hardly been interrogated over the past week of his detention, and he asks: Is this true?
The investigator again refers to the confidential file, but Justice Lieberman adds that the suspect was interrogated three times, but only for very a short time.
Summing up: the judge rules that there is no reasonable explanation for the suspect having been held during the latest extension, without the extra days being used for the investigation. Taking into account the long period of detention, he therefore sees no justification to acceding to the police’s request. There are still grounds for investigation, however.
He rules 8 days.
To our surprise, we again saw Abdullah Hashem Abdullah Jubara – ID 936110626, age 17.
Once again we meet this young man, who is unafraid and straight-backed. We look for his attorney, Naji Aamer, but again we don't see him nor any of hisfamily members.
The police once more requests 8 additional days, with the defence counsel’s consent.
The judge’s decision:the investigator requests 8 more days. The young man was arrested on 6.12.10. He was involved in the grave incident, in which an Israeli was seriously wounded (the charge appearing on the first request for extension is: ‘took part in ‘disturbance to the public order’). He adds that he has received an agreement signed by all the parties to an extension of 8 days.
Despite the agreement, he thinks that the period of detention has already exceeded the bounds of the reasonable, taking into account the young age of the detainee and the charges against him. He usually does not tend to breach agreements, but this time he will diverge from his usual practice.
Instead of 8 days, he rules 7 days, and in fact decides to transfer the file to the prosecution. It will be interesting to follow the representation of young Abdullah Jubara.
Louai Fahmi Abed Al Majid Nasser al-Adin, ID 043135623
Defence counsel: Att. Aamer Yassin
The wife and brother of the detainee are present. The wife is in the late stages of pregnancy.
Counsel has filed an appeal over the number of extra investigation days that the police is requesting. He asks for the case to be transferred to the prosecution within 24 hours. Attempts to reach agreement have failed. The investigator proposes (and claims that this is an outstanding suggestion) another 7 days. The defence does not agree. In his summation, he explains that even though his appeal was dismissed, the Court of Appeals suggested that in view of the advanced stage of the investigation, the necessary actions will take place during the detention period. It was emphasised in the appeals court that considerations of the internal investigation team (work schedules, or work pressure) should not be deemed considerations to be taken into account in justifying the continued detention.
The judge’s ruling: he agrees with the remarks of the defence counsel and the Court of Appeals.
He gives the police 30 hours to transfer the file to the prosecution, and asks for the records to write down that the time is 12 noon.
See previous report: 10.1.11