Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Remand Extension, Barred (from meeting with attorney)
Translation: Diana Rubanenko
Judge: Meir Lachan
Police investigator: Nissim Argaman
Defence Attorneys: Odeh, Maamoun Hashim, Fahmi Shkirat
Three cases in the docket.
The case of Az-Addin Abed Al Aziz Hassin, I.D. 913978359, who is barred from meeting an attorney, has been transferred to Ashkelon (see previous report).
Hamza Ibrahim Mussa Zaharan, I.D. 942313693
Defence: Attorney Odeh
The police investigator requested 7 additional days of remand in custody to conclude the case. The judge understood that the parties had reached an agreement, but Atty Odeh announced explicitly that he does not consent to a remand extension in order to conclude the investigation. He did agree, though, to that number of days, if they are needed to transfer the file to the prosecution.
The judge explained to the defence that concluding the case means collecting all the material – that is, “organizing the case”.
The defence claimed that the detainee denies all charges against him.
Files of people who were involved in that accusation have already been transferred to the prosecution.
The detainee has been going through of a very harsh interrogation period of close to 50 days. He maintains that his investigators applied illegal means, and that for 40 days he was barred from meeting an attorney. He was deprived of sleep, interrogated day and night for long hours, and psychological pressure and threats were used against him – that if he didn’t sign, his relatives would be arrested. Most recently, he was tied to his bed for a day and a half, on the claim that he wanted to commit suicide (a punishment given him because he refused food). He was in isolation throughout the entire period of his detention.
The judge interrupted the defence’s speech and asked: “And why are your telling me all this?” (!)
The attorney ended by saying that the police could by now have concluded the investigation proceedings.
The judge decided that the police are asking for a reasonable time, bearing in mind the confidential material in the file, including a document dated 27.2.11.
“I am now assured” said the judge, “regarding the period that the police is requesting. These are, in fact, only 4 working days” (because of Friday and Saturday).
In Justice Lachan’s summation, he did not refer to the defence’s claim that the interrogation team used illegal measures, and made no attempt to check if the claim was true or not.
Hassan Hassnin Hassan Shuka, I.D. 9361222621
Defence Attorney Maamoun Hashim: the police are asking for another 15 days for the investigation. He tried to extract information so as to understand what period of the charge – ‘activity against security in the region’ – was being referred to.
According to the investigator, it is hard to state the exact time, but it seems that the charge against the suspect relates to a period when he was under administrative detention [???]. Which means that the detainee was brought for investigation on 16.2.11 from his detention cell, where he was apparently being held for other offences. Time and again, investigator Nissim said that he cannot answer the attorney’s questions, because the information is confidential.
The defence attorney summed up: he sees no reason to continue investigating the detainee, because there are no grounds for his arrest.
But the judge argued that the confidential reports were before him, and hoped that the investigation team would work energetically to advance the investigation. He was under the impression that they are they are doing their utmost to shorten the investigation. Therefore he consents to add 12 more days of interrogation.
Firas Akel Mustafa Dar Alhaj, I.D. 949794234
Defence: Atty Fahmi Shkirat
The police request another 8 days for the investigation.
Defence: the suspect has given his version to the police, and linked himself to the suspicions against him, namely, planning to ‘trade with combat materiel’, but not to the charge of ‘membership [in an illegal organization]’. Why is there any need for additional interrogations?
The investigator sums up: the charge is “activity against security in the region”.
The defence attorney does not agree to the remand extension – the third one.The police had plenty of time to conclude the investigation. Moreover, the accused has admitted his connection to the “planning” charge.
The judge sums up by saying that in view of the confidential material, the additional days requested are justified.