Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Remand Extension, Barred (from meeting with attorney)

Observers: 
Roni Hammermann, Tova Szeintuch (reporting)
Mar-28-2011
|
Morning

Translation: Diana Rubanenko

Russian Compound

Judge: Col. Shalom Dahan

Police investigator: Nissim Argaman

Defence Attorney: Maamoun Hashim, Fahmi Shkirat

 

There were 3 cases in the docket today; one of them was barred from meeting an attorney.

 

On 21.3.11 we were present at the remand extension of three detaineesinfo-icon – two residents of Awarta, and the other a resident of A-Ram.

 

The remand of two of them were extended by an additional 8 days, for further investigations. The third received a four-day extension (Abed al Rachman Yassin Nasser Jabali ID 850822818). They appealed that extension. The defence attorney, Maamoun Hashim, did not know what decision had been made about the appeal, because the files of the two detainees from Awarta had been transferred to the court in the North.

 

The third detainee,Aassem Mussa Ibrahim Mansour, ID 904381902, appeared in court today as barred from meeting with his attorney, Maamoun Hashim.

 

The two other detainees whose cases were heard:

 

Ala'a Bassem Jodath Adwan, ID 8517 3930

 

Muhammad Raef Orkhian Alhir, ID 854579166

 

The two are accused of activity against regional security.The charges against Mansour (the barred detainee) were not discussed at this session, but at the previous session he too was accused of the above charge.

 

Regarding Muhammad Alhir, the police requested 8 more days to investigate.  After ascertaining the age of the suspect, who is a resident of Surif, aged 17 and 10 months, the judge said that he considers him a minor, and he granted only 4 more days to complete the investigation.

 

15 more days were sought for the second detainee, a resident of Al Azzariya. The judge first asked the investigator if an alternative to detention could be considered; he received a firm answer about the detainee’s dangerous nature, and then granted 11 more days. The conversation between the suspect and the defence attorney made it clear to the latter that the charge is “firing shots at a wedding”.

 

I will not elaborate about the barren discussion regarding the defence attorney’s questions and the investigator’s replies – which were all identical: either “It’s in the confidential report”, or  “I am unable to answer”, or else he cited the clause or sub-clause in which the grounds are given. The defence attorneys learned nothing from their questioning  the police investigator.

 

Banned from meeting an attorney: Aassam Mussa Ibrahim Mansour:

 

After Defence Attorney Hashim asked his questions, and Roni and I were asked to leave the courtroom so that the suspect could be brought in for questioning by the court, we showed the judge the preliminary injunction of the Supreme Court (which recommends permitting civilians to observe the proceedings – for the sake of holding public hearings). The judge said that he does not care to interfere - he asks the investigator, and respects his opinion.