Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Holding and trading of combat materiel, Remand Extension

Observers: 
Roni Hammermann, Tova Szeintuch (reporting)
Mar-7-2011
|
Morning

 Translation: Diana Rubanenko

Russian Compound

 

Judge: Shmuel Fleishman

Police investigator: Bashir Amar

Defence Attorney: Fahmi Shkirat

 

There were two cases in the docket.

 

Firas Akal Muztafa Dar. I.D. 949794234

 

Since no woman police officer was available to perform a physical check on us (a prerequisite for entering), we entered the courtroom after discussions had begun. The defence attorney was apparently trying to prove that there is no reason to extend the suspect’s detention, because he does not admit to any of the charges attributed to him.

 

From the judge’s summary we understood that there is a problem with a document that the investigators did not place in the file, and this is hampering him from making a final decision. Investigator Nissim Argaman entered then exited, to clarify the matter.

 

Meanwhile the judge started to dictate his decision:

 

The suspect was arrested under administrative detention on 21.1.11. Since 8.2.11 he has been held in regular detention conditions. Today they discussed the fourth remand extension. During part his detention, the detainee was barred from meeting an attorney.

 

The file contains confidential reports from previous remand extensions. This is where the problem cropped up: the suspect’s file contains no document concerning his being barred from meeting an attorney, or about the removal of the prevention. It is not clear if the prevention was removed yesterday, or the day before yesterday.

 

Judge Fleishman added that the suspect linked himself in his statement to offences that, though they are relatively old, are liable to harm regional security. The police representative argued that a grave offence is attributed to the suspect, and it must beinvestigated.

 

At this point the discussion was halted so that the head of the investigation team could explain to the judge ex parte the confusion created due to the missing document (I must note that we failed to understand the problem).

 

The head of the team spent some time in a discussion with the judge and with investigators Nissim Argaman and Amar.  We observers stood outside, with the defence attorney, the detainee and four policemen fromthe Nachshon unit who were guarding the detainee.

 

We heard that the detainee is fromTzurif village, and that he is suspected of ‘connections with weapons’.

 

The head of the team came out, and we all went back into the courtroom.

 

From the conversation between the defence attorney and the judge, before the team-head came in, it seemed to us that the judge actually intended to release the detainee, but the intention was foiled following the judge’s conversation with the head of the investigation team.

 

The judge explained to the defence attorney that an injunction prohibiting a meeting [with an attorney] was in force until 5.3.11, and that the defence attorney had not been told that it was removed. (The defence attorney noted that such a notification would not have helped him, because the detainee was held in an area to which the defence attorney has no permit to enter). The injunction was issued on 3.3.11 and expired on 5.3.11. The judge instructed that the minutes show that he requests a written explanation why there had been no notification regarding the removal of the injunction. He also requested a copy of the letter explaining the absence of the document concerning the removal of the injunction, so he could examine it.

 

The judge added a further 8 days remand for investigation purposes, noting that progress had been made in the detainee's investigation. Progress was slow, but existed.

 

Az-addin Abdelaziz Hassin Hamidat, I.D. 913978359

 

(see previous reportdated 21.2.11 re this case)

 

Agreement was reached to transfer the case to the prosecution on Sunday. The judge asked whether the detainee has any medical problems, and the detainee replied that yes, he suffers from headaches and has kidney problems. Yes, he had seen a doctor who gave him medication: yes, Acamol [Paracetamol!!!].

 

The judge asked to record in the minutes his request that the doctor check the detainee concerning his complaint about kidney problems.