Extensions of Detention – Ofer Military Base 14.02.06Observers: Nurit S., Hava H., Hagit S. (recorder)Translation: Erez L.Judge: A.Courthouse – Room #7 – similar, like last time, to a train station waiting room. The attorneys and the detainees enter and exit through one of the doors, while we, along with family members, etc., pass through the other. In the hour and a half that we spent there, 16 detainees were brought before the judge, some of whom were children aged 13 or 14, and some of them looked no more than 9 years old. In some of the cases, we didn’t even have a chance to follow the proceedings – the whole process takes a minute or a minute and a half. The judge listens for a minute, and then decides for how many more days to lengthen the detention. The detainees are then led out of the courtroom by police officers, and new detainees are brought before the judge. The families of the first group of detainees shuffle out, and the families of the new detainees come in. The attorneys also change – they come in and out, they chat with the prosecutor. The translator imposes order and quiet in the place.The first detainee that we saw, a 55 year old man who looked much older than his years, is a construction worker and a father of 9 children. He was apprehended crossing back from Jordan on the bridge with money. We don’t know how much money he had on him, but it seems like the sum, which had meanwhile been confiscated, was sufficient to arouse suspicions enough to detain the man and proceed with an investigation. The prosecutor claimed that the money was destined for Hamas, and as such was evidence in ‘support of the organization.’ The defense attorney, T., stated, on behalf of the detainee, that he received the money from charitable organizations for charitable purposes, that he is a father of a large family, that “he has no prior record,” and that he was in Jordan visiting family members. The defense attorney requested that court release the detainee on bail pending trial.The judge ruled: There exists solid evidence based on the confession of the detainee himself. In consideration of this fact, and also the fact that he is an aging man who has “no prior record” and a substantial family to provide for, for this case, I rule that the detainee shall be released on bail pending trial, with bail set at 10,000 ₪, and order that the detainee not approach or enter a mosque.The question arose as to who was to post the bail. The detainee’s wife, who was seated in the courtroom, called out that she would pay the bail. However, the judge required that the bail be posted by “someone who has a paystub [from their employer].”- “There are no paystubs in the Occupied Territories,” stated the defense attorney.Finally, the judge was convinced that the signature of the owner of a butcher shop, who was not present in the courtroom, would be sufficient to guarantee the bail. The prosecutor immediately requested to delay the release of the detainee on bail for 72 hours so that he could appeal the decision. The case was set to appear before new judge on 8.3. We’ll try to follow the subsequent proceedings.There were two groups of children that were accused of various things: throwing stones, throwing burning bottles, membership in hostile organizations and participation in aiding and abetting the intentional killings of others. The defense attorneys were H. and his associates. The boy who was accused of throwing a burning bottle is 14 years old and looks very young for his age. Against the objection of the defense attorney, the judge called the boy’s father forward to ask him some question. The judge, through the translator, asked the father, a big man dressed in dusty overalls, why the father didn’t watch over his son and make sure that his son doesn’t through burning bottles? “Do you promise to keep an eye on him in the future?”The young father stated agitatedly that the boy is a good boy, and the judge proclaimed: “I have conversed with the father, and this conversation only served to strengthen my original impression that what we have here is a case of a one-time offense, and that the father’s promise to ensure a strict supervision and care of the child is reliable. For a boy like this, time spent in prison would not be useful. Therefore, I sentence the boy to six months incarceration, with the time he has already spent in detention (one week) counting as his active prison term, and the remainder being covered by a suspended sentence of 3 years.” The prosecutor immediately stated his intention to appeal the ruling.Another boy was accused of membership in an organization – he was also 14 years old. The attorney demanded a change to the conviction, and the judge urged the prosecutor to reach an agreement with the defense attorney. The prosecutor agreed to a bargain whereby the boy would serve a prison term of 10 months plus a suspended sentence plus pay a fine of 500 ₪. The judge, in the end, sentenced the boy to 6 months in prison, with a further suspended sentence of 5 years and a fine of 500 ₪. An interesting question to ask is what are the actual sums of money that are collected from the Palestinian detainees – boys who throw stones or from others. In the time that we were there, fines of 500 ₪ were opposed on many of them. The events are written in a laconic and business-like manner, but whoever knows how to read through the dry language can see the horror in the facts.