Military court Ofer, 7.8.06Observers: Irus ., Roni H. (reporting)Room Nr.2, Judge TiroshWe came to hear the continuation in the law suit of Iman Abu Daud who is accused of trying to kill a settler in Hebron by shooting and of planting a bomb ( defense lawyer Sha’aban). Tova S. reported about the session on 31.7.06, in which a witness of the prosecution was investigated, Muhammed Abu Bahag, who has incriminated the accused under heavy torture. He related in details the various forms of torture which were applied to him and said that under this torture he would have incriminated his own father as well. When Muhammed Abu Bahag, a client of Leah Tsemel, was brought into the courtroom, he looked apologetically at Iman. Muhammed himself has not yet been convicted and his appearance as witness without the presence of his lawyer poses a weighty question.Today another witness of the prosecution was supposed to be heard. Iman’s lawyer, Sha’aban, was not prepared for this particular witness and the one for whom he was prepared, could not be brought before the court. Therefore the hearing was postponed for Tuesday, 8.8.06, 10 o’clock.One of the fringe benefits of observing in the military court is to witness the bursts of joy of the prisoners when they can see their family members for the short time of their hearing. It is the only opportunity they have to exchange some words, some news, some smiles and to receive encouragement. The families have to sit in the last row of the court room and the prisoners have to be in the dock. But there are innumerable ways to communicate between loved ones. Lips reading, sign language, gesticulation and also, of course, loud speaking. The soldiers who guard the courtroom are responsible for “order” at court and try to prevent the conversations between prisoners and his family and very often they threaten the families with eviction of the room. Today there was, for a change, a humorous incident in room Nr.1, under the presidency of the judge Ronen. One of the prisoners, whose name I could not understand, because the lawyer, the interpreter, the prosecutor and the prisoners were speaking simultaneously, raised his hand and asked to say something. He protested vigorously against the fact that he is shut up by the soldiers whenever he wants to talk to his parents. The judge was flabbergasted. He did not know how to react. After a couple of seconds of recovered and said that this was not a family visit, but a court and that he could speak with his parents but without shouting. The soldiers were even more surprised about this “judgement”, but for a couple of minutes they did not interfere. Sometimes it seems that the prisoners are much less interested in the conduct of their law suit, than in the conversations with the family and that there are 2 different circles of interaction. One between the defense lawyers, prosecutor and judge and one between the prisoners and their families. Given the complete lack of influence the prisoners have on the outcome of their case, this is not surprising.