Russian Compound, Jerusalem - Remand Extension, Health Problems
Translation: Diana Rubanenko
Judge: Dov Gilboa
Police investigator: Nissim Argaman
Defence: Maamoun Hashim
There are 6 cases in the docket, two of which have been barred [from meeting an attorney].
Judge Gilboa arrived at around 11:00, and deliberations began only then.
Sajed Hassan Abed al Kadr Alkata, I.D. 852938216 – barred from meeting his attorney.
The investigator seeks a remand extension of 18 days and presents Justice Gilboa with a thick file of investigation documents. The detainee was arrested on 11.10.10. Since then he has been under investigation - that is, 34 days. He was declared barred only on 18.10, and since then the prohibition has not been removed.
The defence attorney asks the police investigator:
Q. Has the investigation made progress?
A. The answer is in the confidential report.
Q. Has the detainee linked himself to the suspicions?
A. There are gaps.
Q. Has he given his version?
A. Yes, he links himself to some of the suspicions.
Q. Has he been questioned about membership in Hamas?
A. The suspicion appears in the report.
The defence attorney asks the judge’s intervention to obtain a more detailed answer.
Justice Gilboa refuses, and supports the police investigator.
This ploy is repeated at least once more.
Q. How many more investigation sessions have to be performed?
The investigator checks the file and replies –
- Eight. The suspicions are complex and grave, and their investigation is
complicated and wide-ranging.
Q. A remand extension of 18 days is unusual: another 15 days can be requested. For how many days, hours and seconds has the suspect been investigated by the GSS?
A. He underwent intensive investigations.
The judge intervenes and asks the defence attorney to conclude his questions and concentrate on the remand extension. The judge talks aggressively and points out that he is the one who decides here, and this is his decision.
Q. Does the suspect have any medical problems? (we know from his attorney that during his prolonged detention, he visited the clinic)
A. Refers to a section in the confidential report.
Justice Gilboa requests to conclude the proceedings.
We show Justice Gilboa the preliminary injunction of the High Court decision, so he can consider allowing us to remain for the part where the detainee is brought in.
After glancing at the document, he demands firmly that we leave.
Muhamed Abdulla Muhamed Abed, I.D. 41028722. Resident of Ramallah.
The investigator again requests a remand extension of another 18 days.
The detainee was arrested in October this year. He is 66.
The defence attorney talks to his client. The police investigator walks in and out, constantly talking on his phone. It’s unclear if the detainee is barred, or not.
The discussion between the defence attorney and his client is halted. During the first ten days of his detention, the detainee was not barred. It was only afterwards that he was declared barred from meeting his attorney. The ban ended on 14 October, at night. It was unclear if they had asked to renew the ban. The parties are waiting for a letter that will clarify the matter, but so far it hasn’t arrived and the remand extension discussion continues.
The defence attorney’s questions revolve around a meeting and his client’s connection with a person named Azzam Lakra (?)
A.: The status of the investigation appears in the report, I can’t relate to the question, because it concerns names.
The judge responds to the repeated questions of Attorney Hashim about Azzam Lakra (?) by saying that he refuses to hear any more questions about that name, and asks the defence attorney to focus on the remand extension and to sum up.
The judge’s decision: another 8 days.
Abed al-Razek Said Abed al-Razek Hassib, I.D. 900477126
His lawyer is Attorney Firas, but since he has to appear in court at the same time in Ashkelon, Attorney Hashim is replacing him.
The police are seeking a remand extension of another 15 days for the investigation. This will be the fifth extension. The detainee has already been detained and under investigation for a month and five days.
Q. Have you managed to complete the investigation?
A. There are six more actions to perform.
Q. The detainee says that he was not interrogated for 20 consecutive days, and when he was taken for a two-hour interrogation, he was questioned for only 20 minutes. Perhaps you have nothing else to investigate?
Summing up, the judge granted the police a further 8 days.
We saw, and in particular in the matter of the first detainee, how easy it is to grant more days for investigation, even when the detainee has not met his attorney – the person who is meant to defend him and his rights – for close to a month. One after the other, the judges added more days, apparently without taking into account the detainees being barred, and the numerous days of investigation.