Military Court at Petach Tikva, 18.01.06Reporters: Rachel and Liliatranslation: Brenda H.Note: See attached lists at the end of this report fora) complaints about the conditions of detention and interrogation b) The details of the category of “Prevented” We arrived at 11:00am, the hearing had already begun at 10am. In the corridor we recognised the script of the play: A prisoner with his eyes covered with a blindfold, hands and legs in chains and with his face to the wall. Entering the courtroom is another strange reality. It is a familiar scene, only the judge and the translator were different. The judge was Itai Regev, who is also the judge at Nablus. He is an attorney for criminal affairs in civilian life and for some years, once a week for his army reserve duty, he sits on the military court bench. Every prisoner sits with an army guard at his side. The defense lawyer is not permitted to sit next to the prisoner.Today there were 18 prisoners, four who were prevented of seeing a lawyer, one being a minor of 17 years of age. As they were brought into the courtroom, the blindfolds are taken off, and as they leave, they are blindfolded again. They have to go up and down a considerable number of steps with their hands and feet chained and their eyes closed.We saw one of the prisoners knock his face against an electrical installation in the corridor. At one point, the civilian prosecutor left the hall and took photos of the prisoner (maybe also of others prisoners).Like on a moving strip, the prisoners were brought in, each following the previous one, and led out as quickly as possible,. Later, we were told that these were prisoners whose interrogations were completed and their files were brought to serve indictments. Some were being transferred to other lawyers or locations, like Salem Military Court.We saw that some prisoners were just wearing rubber thongs on their feet, with no socks and it was a very cold day. Even the lawyers complained that the prisoners did not have suitable clothing. They had been in that condition for some days. It was the fifth day here for one of them who did not even have shoes, said a defence lawyer. No one had asked him any questions or explained “his rights” to him, said the defense lawyer.The discussion, as far as there is one, is usually held in a whisper, so that only by chance it is possible to hear anything. We could not even hear the names of the prisoners. We copied them from the list but it was difficult to know which name belonged to which prisoner because the list was split according to the two lawyers.Not only was there no possibility to hear the discussion but there is no protocol. The two lawyers, here at Petach Tikva, were only dealing with the stage of serving indictments. One of them, Abed Mohammed, an Israeli, was from the non profit organization “Ansar el-Sajeen”, and the other, Nizar Rajanah, was from the organisation called Nadi El-Assir. One of the prisoners had a lawyer whom we did not know, and it appeared that this was a private arrangement.According to the defense lawyer of one of the prisoners, he had been held for several days and still not interrogated because it was claimed that there was a “lack of manpower”. The lawyer said that according to his information, there are enough interrogators and it would certainly be feasible to manage a shorten the arrest. The judge listened, wrote down something and then prolonged detention to 15 days.The judge prolonged detention of one of the prisoners to 60 days. The lawyer expressed his astonishment: “Why, when all the others are 15 day terms, this prisoner is given 60 days?”The judge looked at the confidential report that of course the lawyer was not privileged to see, and confirmed his decision.One prisoner, aged 17, also had his detention prolonged even after the lawyer’s protest. After him, his elderly father was led in, a ” prevented” (he was the one who hit his head on the electrical installation in the corridor because his eyes were covered). It seems that they are holding him to put pressure on his son, and holding the son, to put pressure on the father. An uncle in this family was also among the prisoners. We saw that they took the father down the many stairs with his eyes covered, in spite of the fact that a few minutes earlier, the prosecutor requested that they take off the blindfold while he was going down the stairs (probably because of our presence) .A conversation with the lawyers reveal, that our presence results in the courtroom showing a more humanitarian approach…is this possibly true?Complaints from prisoners about conditions of detention:We heard the same complaints from many of the prisoners, as well as from the lawyers.1. The black blindfolds – the prisoners claim that this is to prevent them seeing each other, and that brings up the question of why they are not at least removed when they are brought to the court room, the lawyers claim that this is a system to put pressure and to prevent them seeing daylight for weeks or months.2. Handcuffs and fetters. There is no reason to handcuff, or chain their legs – they are not about to suddenly “fly away”.Our comments: a. The prisoners going up the stairs, handcuffed, fettered and blindfolded , how on earth they manage to do so, can easily stumble and fall.b. Why do they have to stand around for such a long time? Is it not possible to give them chairs? This seems to be another way of putting on the pressure.3. We heard a lot of complaints from the prisoners that they are kept handcuffed so much one can see marks, and even that sometimes the handcuffs cause nerve damage to their hands.4. The prisoners do not get supply of underwear for two or three weeks sometimes until the Red Cross arrives. We heard this in the court room.5. Not allowing smoking is a way of increasing the pressure. We also heard this in the courtroom from a prisoner.6. During the interrogations by the General Security Services, there are threats to destroy their homes and arrest family members – including elderly people, and things are said that insult the honour of family members, their mothers and sisters.7. They are not given enough to eat. ..we heard this from a prisoner in the courtroom.8. Political prisoners do not receive the same food as criminal prisoners. Sometimes the food is spoiled. They are served meat maybe once a month.9. Sometimes they are not allowed to shower for two or three weeks.10. There are complaints of being hit and kicked on their arms and legs. They are seated backwards on a chair and tied, “banana tied” hours at a time.11. Administrative detention: as long as there has been no interrogation, it is possible to keep the prisoner in administrative detention without a hearing. When it is decided to interrogate the prisoner, the procedure is simple: they present him to the judge who ends the administrative detention.12. The prisoners are frightened to complain.13. It is crowded in the cells – sometimes there are four prisoners in a cell measuring 2 square meters.14. We saw many prisoners without socks, wearing open thongs on a very cold day, and this appears to be happening frequently.15. For days after arrest no one explains to the prisoners what will happen (will it be administrative detention or interrogation?) and no one tells them of their rights.“The Prevented Category” – i.e. those who are not allowed to meet with a lawyer. On our former visit, there were 8 out of 15 prisoners in this category, on this visit there were 4 out of 18.From our conversations with the lawyers, we understood that this is one of the most serious topics. When a discussion on the subject was brought before the judge, they sent both us and the lawyers from the court room. There was a quick discussion but neither we nor the lawyers have any idea what went on. One of the people who was an “overseer” explained to us that the translator explains to the suspect what the accusations are and also explains that he is not allowed to meet with his lawyer. According to the “overseer”, the suspect leaves the hall, the lawyer goes in, hears an explanation from the court and has to respond to this.The lawyers explained to us that it is possible to call somone “prevented” at any stage of the investigation, and because he is “prevented” he will not get any explanation of his rights or any access to the closed material of the lawyers. As he cannot meet his lawyer, he cannot sign over power of attorney to allow the lawyer to defend him. Nor can the lawyer argue in the name of the prisoner that he should be removed from the “prevented” category. We understood this as one of the most severe infringments of human rights. A lawyer said to the judge at a specific stage: How can I work to defend a prisoner in this category? The judge answers: That is precisely why this category exists. At the break, Lilia talked with the judge, and he said, that the status “prevented” is now beginning to be used in the criminal court.