Detention house, Migrash H’Rusim, Jerusalem, Thursday, 15.12.05Observers: Hava H, Hagit S. D.Translation: Brenda H.No one opened the gate or the door to the Court room at 10 am as we had arranged on the previous day with Sam Y. Finally after a number of telephone calls, promises, explanations, misunderstandings and an hour and a half of anticipation we were ushered in.This time it was another judge. He was wearing a Yarmulka, understood Arabic and ignored our existence. We didn’t recognize his name. There was a different prosecutor from the previous occasion, in civilian clothing but almost certainly from the General Security Services. We didn’t recognize his name either. There was a translator, a transcriber, an official from the prison service, Hassid S. the policeman officially appointed for detention extensions, and in one of the two cases where we were allowed to be present there was also a lawyer. We were excluded from 6 cases where prisoners were prevented from meeting with a lawyer.Ayman Eyasa Mahmoud had a full plaster cast on his leg and needed crutches to walk. The judge allowed him to sit. He was arrested on 8 December suspected of actions threatening the security forces. The prosecutor requested extension of detention for an extra 20 days. The judge looked the confidential report in the file where there was information from intelligence linking the suspect to the felony. The defense lawyer talked for a couple of minutes with the prisoner who complained about not being able to shower without help.The prisoner told the lawyer that in the process of his arrest he was sent to Hadassah hospital, and also that there had already been three meetings with the General Security Services from which nothing had emerged (meaning that he refused to cooperate, as I understood, Hagit). The lawyer told the judge that he did not know what was suspected. He asked the prosecutor where and when the man was arrested. The prosecutor searched the file, and in the end chanted the mantra that there was information from intelligence linking the suspect with threats to area security and that the actions were documented in confidential information in the file. The lawyer requested 11 days extension of detention. The judge granted 15 days and asked that the man be helped to shower. Prisoner number 8 whose name we did not manage to catch, came in handcuffed. No lawyer was present. He was suspected of security breaches.He was arrested on 8 December 2005. In the secret file was information from intelligence, only for the judge’s to read. The prosecutor requested 20 days extension of detention. The judge asked the prisoner if he wanted to say anything, and the prison said he was a schoolteacher, a Muslim who opposes violence and terror in the world and also in this region. He has a sister who is mentally ill and in hospital and he looks after her. The judge awarded 15 days.Summing up, again we were once again in the presence of a victimization by routine (even the handcuffs which apparently needed to be kept in place throughout the discussion.) A short bureaucratic process by which the judge, the prosecutor, and the defense lawyer if there even was one, glance at the material in front of them. Each goes through the performance ….says the expected piece and goes on to the next prisoner. Today, our “achievement” was a meeting that we made with the lawyer for next week. There will be a separate report for this.