Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Remand Extension, Barred (from meeting with attorney)
Translation: Diana Rubanenko
Judge: Major Yitzhak Ozdim
Police investigator: Omri Awwida
Attorneys: Ma’amoun Hashim, Firas Sabbah
5 cases in the docket, including of two people who were barred from meeting with an attorney.
We attended the hearings of both the barred people.
The first case: remand extension - continuation from 23.1.12
Mahmoud Rabbah Shukri 'Aasi - ID 999838402
Defence Attorney: Ma’amoun Hashim
The exchange between the police investigator and the defence counsel was conducted in the usual spirit: "it's all in the classified report", but there were a few questions which, following the court's intervention, the investigator was required to answer. For example:
The defence asked whether the detainee connects himself to the charges of which he is accused. The investigator's response: "Partially, he connects himself to some of the charges".
The defence asked how many times the suspect has been interrogated by the GSS. Answer: 30 times.
Then Mamoun Hashim requested a clarification: After so many interrogations, he links himself partially to the charges?
The charge relates to activities against the security of the region, carried out together with Muhammad Salah Bader (see report from 23.1.12 ).
When the questioning by the defence ended, we were asked to leave, because they wanted to bring in the barred detainee.
We showed the judge the preliminary injunction document of the Supreme Court, recommending that we be allowed to remain present in all parts of the hearing, as part of the public nature of the proceedings. He read it and decided to let us stay in the court. Like last week, the police investigator tried to demand an in camera proceeding.
The judge objected, and then the investigator tried to postpone the start of the hearing until the head of the investigation team could explain to the honourable judge the danger inherent in our presence throughout the proceedings. The judge refused to wait. He mentioned that the previous week we had attended hearings, and noted that he saw no reason to prevent our presence in today's session.
The suspect was brought in. He was told what had happened in the first part of the hearing, and was then taken out.
The head of the investigation team entered, because the next case also related to a female detainee prohibited from meeting an attorney. He said to the judge that he should be aware that Machsom Watch women publish reports that are liable to jeopardize the investigation.
Judge Ozdim did not accept the explanation by the GSS and decided that Machsom Watch women do not endanger the proceedings. He noted in the minutes that we may not create any contact with the detainee.
Contact is impossible anyway, because the detainee is surrounded on all sides by Prison Service staff, like all other detainees.
Defence counsel Firas Sabbah argued that the detainee is not connected to Hamas, and that she only agreed to take a sick child, the son of a detainee, to Jordan. She also took with her money to pay for the child's treatment.
The detainee is a teacher, aged 37. She wore civilian clothes. This is the first time she has been detained.
In the part of the proceedings during which the detainee is present, but not the defence attorney, the judge told her what the defence counsel had requested, and what the police investigator had requested.
It's hard to understand why an in camera session was necessary (an in camera session is conducted in a courtroom or before a commission of inquiry, and is not public); obviously, the material appearing in the minutes is transferred to the defence counsel immediately after the hearing!