1. Political Arrest

A) The Right for Personal Security and Freedom

Undermining the Rule of Law

Karima Hammad, currently imprisoned for the fourth year, is an example of the hundreds of political detainees who fill Palestinian prisons. They are mistreated in spite of local Palestinian law and international human rights standards. They are taken to detention centres without arrest warrants or summons, and kept there without charges or trials. Besides lacking all legal rights, those political detainees continue to be imprisoned for prolonged periods decided by the head of the security service responsible for their arrests. Those periods frequently continue for four consecutive years. Prisoners withstand inhumane detention conditions in opposition to international human rights laws. Article 9 of the International Declaration of Human Rights states that it is forbidden to summon, stop or arrest any person arbitrarily. Article 8 confirms that every person has the right to “refer to national courts for justice in the case of aggression against his political rights as specified by the law.” Article 10 of the same declaration adds that “Every individual has the right to be treated equally to others, and has the right for his case to be brought before an independent, objective court to do him justice and maintain his rights.”

The PA is clearly flouting local and international laws which forbid arrest or detention of any individual for more than 30 days without a summon or arrest warrant issued by the concerned authority (from the rules of penal law of 1924, in Gaza Strip, Article 10, and the law of criminal trials of 1961 in the West Bank, Article 114).

Furthermore, the law specifies that it is of great importance to check (within 3 days) the reasons for detaining a person for the period of 30 days (Article 100 of the Criminal Courts Law of 1961). The law also states that only the judicial police force has the authority to issue and execute summons and detention warrants.  In the West Bank, this only includes the police service; all other arrests committed by other security services are illegal.

Not only were the rules of the law subjected to the ill practices of the PA, the dignity and autonomy of the Palestinian judiciary were simply abandoned. The security services totally neglected judgements of the High Court of Justice ordering the release of political prisoners. In the best circumstances, the security services postponed the implementation of these decisions. In the year 1999, the High Court of Justice reviewed 19 cases of political arrest, and issued judgements to release 52 political prisoners. Only three of them were actually set free.

The PA has interfered in the judicial branch's affairs in an unusual manner. In August 1997, the High Court of Justice, headed by Judge Amin Abdel-Salam, ordered the release of 10 students from Bir-Zeit University. However, immediately after they were released, the judge who released them was dismissed by the Minister of Justice, Freih Abu Meddein.

Due to these occurrences, political detainees and/or their families try to make contacts with PA officials who deal with security services rather than to seek counseling with the Courts. Appealing to President Arafat, or a head of the security service, has also proven to be an effective means of freeing prisoners.

Social and Psychological Effects of PA Prisons

Iyad Mohammed Rifai Salah, 25 years old, was detained by the PA for more than four years. After his release he became nervous and paranoid. He rarely sleeps and has become withdrawn and delusional. He frequently hallucinates.

Similarly, Hisham Mohammed Ali al-Kahlout, 23 years old, was released from the PA prisons and placed directly into a psychiatric clinic in Gaza city.

Hussein Ali Abu-Zneid, 70 years old, has six sons, and lives with all of them and their families in Dura/Hebron. Two of his sons are imprisoned in Israel. On 1 October 1999 a force from the Preventive Security Service raided the house of Abu-Zneid and arrested two more of his sons, Nayef, 28 and married with five children, and Ibrahim, 25, unmarried. Both of them are now in al-Dhahiriya Palestinian prison under interrogation. The father talked bitterly about their conditions. He said that the PA and Israel now share the arrest of four of his sons, and the responsibility of the entire family falls upon him. Additionally, their social circumstances are very difficult.

Imprisonment in general has its negative effects on the prisoner and his family. As is evident from the examples above, imprisonment by one's own authority, particularly under such an antagonistic political situation as there is in Palestine, is even more devastating. A prisoner's arrest often affects the welfare of an entire family, leaving them to suffer in even worse poverty than they had known previously. Moreover, the PA’s departments do not provide any assistance to those families. They only offer help to families of prisoners arrested by Israel.

Since 1994, the total number of political prisoners reached 4000, of whom 250 are still in prison for various reasons. We classify those into two categories:

Political Prisoners

These individuals are detained because they belong to or support Islamic leftist groups which oppose the peace process with Israel. Most of them are affiliated with either the Hamas “Islamic Resistance Movement” or the Islamic Jihad organisation. They are normally arrested in campaigns carried out by the PA after certain political events take place in the region. These political prisoners suffer from long detention without trial.

Since the establishment of the PA, the PHRMG has managed to document five series of arrest campaigns. The Palestinian security services opened the marathon of political arrest immediately after taking over control in the areas by detaining about 800 persons, most of whom were released within few days. A few were kept for more than 50 days, however.

The second campaign came in late February 1996, when 1200 Palestinians were arrested by the PA and accused of membership in Islamic organisations. Some of those were kept in detention and tortured for weeks. Then in 1998, following the killing of Moheyeddin al-Sharif, one of the military leaders of Hamas, about 40 persons were arrested in Ramallah and accused of plotting the assassination.

The year 1999 witnessed two campaigns of arrest -- one in January, and the other in August. The latter one came after the signing of the “Sharm” agreement (amended Wye) in which 47 individuals were arrested. In these arrests, the people detained are normally interrogated about their relationships with political groups.

Prisoners of Conscience

Political arrest also includes all those who oppose the PA and publicly criticize it. This kind of arrest attracts the attention of the media and raises international concern. In general the public widely condemns such arrests, which in turn escalates the release of prisoners. An exception to this is the arrest of Abdel-Aziz Rantisi, who was arrested on 9 April 1998 following an interview with the “Jerusalem Post.” He is still detained in Al-Saraya Prison in Gaza City.

At the end of November 1999, the Palestinian Intelligence Service and the State Security Police issued detention orders against nine people who were accused of writing and publishing a petition that criticized President Arafat and exposed corruption within the PA.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM?

Security Prisoners

These individuals were accused by the PA of collaborating with Israel and were subsequently arrested. According to the peace agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinians, it is forbidden to bring persons accused of collaborating with Israel in front of the Palestinian judiciary. Thus, those individuals now detained on such a charge will most likely remain in prison for life.

The issue of security prisoners is normally dealt with in secrecy. Most of them are kept in the prisons of the Palestinian military intelligence service, headed by General Mousa Arafat. Human rights activists are not allowed to visit these prisons. Security prisoners are kept in complete

isolation from the outside world. Their families and lawyers are not allowed to visit them.

According to a report from Amnesty International, there are currently about 250 security prisoners who are tortured systematically by the PA.

The PHRMG looks with great worry upon the issue of security prisoners. Since the peace negotiations with Israel, the Palestinian Authority has forbidden the trials of persons accused of collaborating with Israel in the Palestinian courts.  Thus, these charges remain “flexible” for interpretation, which in turn allows the PA to use this term against those whom they consider political antagonists. Moreover, the charge of collaboration has been used on several occasions by members of the Palestinian security services to oust some of their personal enemies. Thus, those victims have lost social credibility within the community and cannot legally defend themselves.

Resisting Political Arrest

On 22 January 1999 the PA released 38 political prisoners who have spent various periods of time in prisons (from two months to three years). Despite all the damage caused by political arrests, the PA continues to practice this matter and claims that they are doing so in the interest of national security.

Juneid Prison Incidents

During the days of the Israeli Occupation, Juneid Prison, the central prison in the north of the West Bank (near Nablus), was a tragic symbol of torture and pain. Since the establishment of the PA, it has become a security site used by the several Palestinian security services including Force 17 (presidential security),  military intelligence and the navy police. Since September 1997, it has been transformed into a detention centre for political prisoners, who are kept in two sections inside the prison. Section Four currently has 21 detainees, and Section Five has 46. Waves of refusal and opposition to political arrest normally erupt from Juneid Prison.

The year 1999 witnessed the longest hunger strike by political detainees inside the PA’s prisons. On 24 January 1999, 48 political prisoners in Juneid Prison, and some from Jericho Central Prison, began a hunger strike which lasted for 36 days. It ended on 28 February 1999, after an agreement with the PA to release or give trials to all detainees who were not convicted on security offenses. Yet the PA evaded executing the agreement, which forced the prisoners’ families to organise a sit-in inside the prison while visiting during the al-Adha feast. The administration of the prison contacted the President of the PA, and at last 20 prisoners were released. However, six of them were arrested again within a few days.

On 23 June 1999 an atmosphere of tension, anger and rage engorged the prison following an announcement that the administration of the prison was going to distribute the detainees into several prisons in an attempt to weaken the protest against the PA’s practices.

The prisoners’ families gathered outside the prison and stayed until after midnight. On 5 July 1999 one of the members of “Force 17” used excessive force during the visit of the families while he was searching and checking them. The same officer started shouting and insulting the families of the prisoners, accusing them of collaborating with Israel. He then threatened to shoot one of the prisoners. The prisoners attacked the guards, but the soldiers shot their rifles in the air repeatedly to control the situation. On 8 July 1999 the prisoners’ families gathered outside the prison calling for the PA to hand over their detained husbands and sons to the Israeli authority of prisons.

Other incidents:

7 January 1999 – detainees in Jenin Prison executed a hunger strike protesting their arrest.

10 January 1999 – Two detainees in Jericho Prison, Muneer Abdel-Majeed al-Huroub and Hisham al-Sharabati announced a hunger strike protesting their continued arrest, and demanded transfer to Hebron. At the end of their 75-day strike, they were unable to stand up for the prayers.

4 February 1999 – Detainee Mohammed Fahmi Abu-Bakr, 22, announced an open hunger strike, protesting his detention. Although he is considered a “Fateh” activist, he was never with the opposition.

1 March 1999 – Dr. Abdel-Aziz al-Rantisi, one of Hamas’ well-known leaders, announced a hunger strike, because the administration of the “al-Saraya” Prison in Gaza City put some criminal prisoners with him in the same room. It is worth mentioning that the High Court of Justice issued a judgement on 4 June 1999 ordering the release of Rantisi.

25 March 1999 – Three detainees – Anwar Hamdan, Iyad Hardan and Khaled Zakarneh – announced their hunger strike in Jericho Central Prison, protesting their arrest of more than four months without charge or trial.

24 April 1999 – More than 100 activists of the PFLP protested outside Jericho Prison against the arrest of Yousef and Shaher al-Raei, from Qalqiliya, who had been given a sentence of six-and-a-half years by the State Security Court. They accused him of murdering two Israelis in the Jericho area. The men were later found innocent after Israel released a third suspect in the case.

Arrest Conditions

In December, the UN General Assembly adopted a “group of principles relating to all persons who may be arrested or detained in any manner.” These principles represent international standards regarding detention and/or the apprehending of individuals, including the circumstances that have to exist for detention. The PA has violated those principles in the following areas:

Detention centres: From the onset of a prisoner’s arrest, it is unlikely to know the place where he will be detained. Families of prisoners usually learn the whereabouts of their relatives unofficially through contacts in the PA. The following conditions complicate matters of locating prisoners: each security service has its own detention centre, officials neglect to follow any identified procedures when arresting a person, and sometimes the guards or officials deny the presence of a prisoner.

Detention Rooms: All detainees are kept in very small rooms (2m²), sometimes even smaller (as in al-Dhahiriya Prison), lacking ventilation. Moreover, more than one person might be put in one small room.

Contact with the outside world: There are no clear regulations allowing TV sets, radios, or printed material into the prisons. Therefore, many prisoners cannot obtain information by any means, and there is no regular postal service to and from prisons. Evidently, the directors of prisons have their own judgement in this issue.

Visits by lawyers or families: The party responsible for allowing such visits is unknown. Normally, permits are required from the general prosecutor, who is generally unrecognized by the security services. In addition, there is no regular system for family visits.  One prisoner may be allowed to see his parents after one week of his arrest, while another may not see them until his release after some months.

Medical care: Doctors rarely see or check detainees when they enter prisons. Visits by doctors are not regular, medicines are not available except by family provision. Prison administrators do not keep records of prisoners’ prescribed medicines. This endangers the lives of the detainees, many of whom are old and suffer from heart conditions, kidney disease, or diabetes. During the year 1999, at least one prisoner died because of lack of medical care.

Food, clothes and cleanliness: The quantity and quality of food in some prisons are not sufficient for the detainees. Families are allowed to bring in food. Clothes are not provided, so families bring them; thus, prisoners who are forbidden from visits remain in the same clothes for long periods of time. Moreover, prison administrators frequently do not provide cleaning materials. Depriving the prisoner of food or cleanliness is often considered a means of putting pressure upon him to confess his charges. The PHRMG has information on cases in which prison officials have given prisoners minuscule amounts of food in hopes of a confession.

Torture: All Palestinian security services practice different forms of torture during interrogation in order to obtain confessions from political prisoners. In the year 1999, at least one person died as a result of torture in the PA prisons. Detainees regularly suffer physical pain and mental anguish at the hands of both interrogators and prison guards. Because of its magnitude, we have dealt with this issue in a separate section in this report.

Denial of privileges from prisoners: Following the clashes in Juneid Prison in July 1999, the conditions in the Palestinian prisons deteriorated drastically in the following areas:

-Printed materials (books, magazines and newspapers) were not allowed in the prisons.

-Breaks in the prison's outside court were limited.

-Sport exercises were not allowed.

-Family visits were disallowed or severely limited.

-Prisoners were isolated from one another.

-Private radios were confiscated from prisoners.

Collective punishment

The Palestinian security services have achieved new lows in their human rights violations in the autonomous areas by using political arrest as a collective punishment, sometimes even threatening an entire family.

Bilal al-Ghoul, a 15-year-old in the 3rd preparatory class, suffered along with his family after his father (Yahia, age 38), a political prisoner, escaped from Al-Saraya Prison on 11 December, 1998. The Palestinian intelligence service arrested Yahia’s wife Wafa’ on the same day. She was released the following day after her family intervened, but to stay at her father’s house. She wasn’t allowed to go back to her eight children for a week. The entire family was put under house arrest for twenty days, and Wafa’s children and brothers were abused by intelligence officers. Bilal’s turn came on 12 Februrary 1999, when a combined security force of 75 men (from the police, preventive security and intelligence service) raided the family’s house and searched everything, questioned Bilal and his mother Wafa’, then took Bilal with them. He remained in detention for 20 days, was beaten and psychologically tortured, and was put in the same room with prisoners who were much older than he.

Political arrests in tandem with the peace agreements

On 5 February 1999, after the Friday prayer, 1,500 demonstrators began a march from Al-Nassr Mosque (in the old city of Nablus) toward the government headquarters (Muqata’a) to protest political arrest and show sympathy for hunger strikers in Juneid and Jericho Prisons. The march ended with clashes with the police. Participants threw stones and empty bottles at the police despite the heavy rain.

Political arrest is a phenomenon that exists in the autonomous Palestinian areas, because the PA connects it with the peace agreements. Both Israel and the United States continually pressure the PA, demanding that the PA arrest “terrorists” from the two Islamic movements – Hamas and the Islamic Jihad – in order to prevent them from carrying out terrorist attacks.  Moreover, Israel demands that the PA not release these people, who have become “political hostages.”

But the PA does not only bend under Israeli or American pressure; it also makes such arrests in order to strengthen its negotiating position.

In early April, the Islamic Jihad carried out two bombing attacks in the Gaza Strip against the settlements of Kfar-Darom and Netsarim, during which two Palestinians were killed. No Israelis were injured.

Despite the failure of the two attacks, the PA launched a massive campaign of arrests among Islamists in the Gaza Strip, especially after Israel's former Prime Minister Netanyahu claimed that the PA was not deploying sufficient efforts in its fight against terror.

Among those arrested was Ibrahim Ismail Al-Halabi, 27, student at the Islamic University in Gaza who is married with two children. He was arrested on 7 April 1999 and was severely tortured during interrogation. He was beaten with heavy wires and forced to stand upside down on his hands for long periods of time. This torture continued until 30 April 1999 when he had a nervous breakdown and confessed that he collaborated with Israeli intelligence, and that he planned for the last two attacks in order to harm and weaken the position of the Palestinian negotiator.

On 4 May 1999 Palestinian TV aired a live press conference in which Al-Halabi announced his confession. Later on it was revealed that high officials were involved in this fabricated TV conference. The Secretary General of the Palestinian Presidency, Tayeb Abdel-Rahim, and Director General of the Ministry of Information, Hasan Al-Kashef, both visited the prison the night before the TV conference, and promised Al-Halabi that he would be released in six months if he confessed in front of a TV camera. The actual persons who committed the two attacks, members of Islamic Jihad military wing, were arrested and confessed their responsibility for the acts. They claimed that the failure of the attacks was due to lack of positive cooperation between members in the movements, inside and outside the country.

It is worth mentioning that no charges were presented against Al-Halabi, and that he has written several letters through his family to various sides, including President Arafat, explaining the conditions of his arrest and torture. There have been no responses from the Authority.

The PHRMG has been following the details of the arrest of Ibrahim al-Halabi with keen interest. It seems that his life is in a precarious situation. Forcing a prisoner to give a false confession in front of TV cameras puts the credibility of the Palestinian Intelligence Service under suspicion. Thus, we demand quick and decisive action to bring al-Halabi to a fair trial, in order to put an end to any speculation.

B) The Right to Free Belief, Expression and Assembly

On 18 November 1994 and for four consecutive days, the PA prevented the distribution of al-Quds, the major daily newspaper in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The head of the Palestinian police, Colonel Ghazi al-Jabali, announced then that this action came as a result of the “bad weather conditions.” He added, “Those journalists are collaborators [with Israel] and the bad weather conditions may continue for some time.”

On 16 December 1999 Abdel-Jawad Saleh, member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, who participated in a rally protesting against political arrest in the PA, was decoyed into the offices of the Palestinian intelligence service in Jericho, where he was attacked by members of the service, severely beaten, then left outside the door.

The two aforementioned incidents are far apart in terms of time, but both of them indicate the stubbornness and brutality of the PA in its campaign against the freedom of expression and press.  This policy came into effect  when the PA took control over the Autonomous areas. Examples of violations committed by the Palestinian Security Services against journalists and press offices are numerous. These abuses and violations created a sense of fear and increased the degree of self-censorship among journalists.

Legal Assurances for Freedom of Expression

Limiting press freedom represents a violation of basic human rights in the Palestinian areas, and also demonstrates an obvious breach of the principles of international law which are related to Palestinian press law.

The International Declaration of Human Rights stresses, in Article 19, the civil and political rights of all individuals, and the right for every person to enjoy freedom of opinion and expression. In addition, Article 19 of the Basic Law of the PA states that “every human being has the right to express his opinion verbally, or in writing, or any other means of expression, or through art or painting, according to the law.” By the same token, the Palestinian Press Law # 5 of 1995 states that “printing and press are two freedoms, and the freedom of expression is guaranteed for every Palestinian.”

The Presidential Decree on Incitement

On 23 October 1998 the two sides, Israel and the Palestinians, signed the “Wye River Memorandum” which included a commitment from the Palestinian side to issue a decree preventing all forms of incitement of violence and terror. Following that, on 19 November 1998, President Arafat issued the Presidential Decree on Incitement which states that "the PA considers all the following forms of action illegal in all areas under Palestinian governance: Incitement of racial discrimination, encouraging acts of violence which violate law, insulting religions, using violence or encouraging the use of violence which harms relations with brotherly or friendly countries, encouraging the masses to make affect changes by illegal means or encouraging internal disputes." It is obvious that this decree did not give a definition to the word “incitement” and used flexible expressions in its text, which enables the PA to use and interpret the details of the decree as it wishes according the situations as they arise.

Therefore, the press in general became a mirror to reflect the official position of the PA and a mouthpiece to announce the views of its high officials.  If the press were to criticize the PA or mention news related to the opposition, the fate of the journalistic source might be closure of the paper or imprisonment of the journalist(s) responsible.

Restricting the Right for Peaceful Assemblies or Rallies

The right to assemble for discussion of political matters, regardless of the nature of these subjects, is considered part of the general right of expression and is preserved in Article 20 of the International Declaration of Human Rights. As stated: "Every person has the right to meet in peaceful organisations and activities." Furthermore, the Jordanian Law for Public Meetings # 60 for the year 1953 stated that "public meetings may take place with a 48 hour prior notice."

- On 9 September 1999 Head of the Palestinian Police Colonel Ghazi al-Jabali issued two decisions ordering that all political meetings or gatherings have to obtain a prior permit from the police, and that bus companies have to obtain similar permits before they transport the members or supporters of any political party.

- On 15 September 1999 the Preventive Security Service arrested the Ramallah journalist Maher Dasouqi for 15 days, and he was charged with incitement, as they (the PSS) accused him of criticizing the way the PA handled the prisoners' case in the TV program that he presents. The above mentioned two examples presented obvious violations of the freedom of expression and opinion committed by Palestinian officials in the PA.

-On 27 and 28 November 1999 the Palestinian Security Services issued detention warrants against, and actually arrested some, well-known Palestinian intellectuals and academics who, together with some PLC members (a total of 20 signatories), signed a document criticizing the performance of the PA and the wide-spread corruption therein. The document, which later became known as “Petition-20,” which was an initiative drawing attention to the negative performance of the PA, was considered by the PA as an attempt to stir internal dispute within the Palestinian society. Violations against the freedom of expression by the PA did not stop at that end. They extended to include mosques and religious preachers. On Friday 5 November 1999, Sheikh Sabri Abu-Diab, 45, from Silwan, gave a speech in the mosque of Hizma village by the title "Pain and Hope" on the occasion of Prophet Mohammed’s Isra’ and Mi’raj (his journey from Mecca to Jerusalem then to heaven), but on 7 November 99 a few men (from the Palestinian Intelligence Service) approached Sheikh Abu-Diab, and he was taken to Ramallah military headquarters (Muqata’a) for questioning which lasted for more than 20 days without any charge or trial. They simply accused him of criticizing President Arafat in his speech.

How can you say “NO” in an authority of “Yes”?

A muzzling policy by the PA

The year 1999 witnessed an escalation in the PA's negative position toward freedom of expression.  There was threat of physical violence and aggression against Palestinian citizens who dared to speak their minds.

Following are some examples

-The beating up of PLC member Abdel-Jawad Saleh (mentioned earlier)

-The attack of human rights activist Hanan al-Masou by throwing stones at her which resulted in her injury

-The attack against PLC member Mu’awiyeh al-Masri following his signing of the “Petition-20” which resulted in his injury

-The kidnapping and beating up of Zuheir Mohammed al-Sweiti, 50, from Beit Hanina in Jerusalem, who was taken to an old deserted cave up in the mountains near Dura, because he made a painting of former Israeli prime minister Ishaq Rabin and presented it to the Israeli left-wing party “Merets.” This action resulted in al-Sweiti suffering from various injuries and broken bones in his chest. He was forced to confess to being a collaborator (for Israel) by the members of the Preventive Security Service who kidnapped and tortured him.

-The severe handling of the Palestinian Military Intelligence of a women's march in Nablus following the unrest in Juneid Prison. On that day, 6 June 99, the women (mothers, wives and sisters of political detainees) were beaten, pushed and abused to the extent that some of them suffered bleeding. In the same scene journalist Ja’far Ishtayeh was beaten by a member of the Palestinian Security Force.

-On 10 March 1999 a group of people gathered in Yabneh camp near Rafah, Gaza Strip, and shouted simultaneously against the decision of the Palestinian State Security Court regarding Ra’ed Ahmad al-Attar, who was convicted by the Court for the killing of Leiutenant Rif’at Joudeh in Rafah. The Palestinian security forces attacked the protesters using live ammunition, killing two of the young men, Alaa al-Hams, 17, and Khamis Salameh.

The incidents mentioned above are clear examples of the aggressive and severely violent policy of the PA responding to Palestinian citizens trying to express themselves peacefully.

C) The Right to Freedom of Political Organisation

1-Islamic National Salvation Party

The Palestinian police set out to arrest the chief editor of al-Risala newspaper and party spokesman Dr. Ghazi Hamad with some of the senior members of the party on 4 March 1999, during a meeting shortly following the internal elections of the party. However, due to illness, Dr. Hamad was not present at the meeting, so the police sent a summons to his wife at home demanding that he report to the police headquarters immediately.

The police force which burst into the meeting seized all the “leaders” of the Islamic National Salvation Party and hauled them to police headquarters to meet with Colonel Ghazi al-Jabali, the head of police, was headed by major Mahmoud Saqr and some 25 members of the security police. Major Saqr told them as they went with him that Colonel al-Jabali wished to see them in his office. According to Ahmad Bahar, one of the well-known leaders of the party, he did not mention the words "detention" or "arrest." They remained in police custody until 2:00am the following day.

As for Dr. Hamad, he was transferred by the police to the preventive security in Tal el-Hawa Prison where he remained for four days. This was the sixth time that he was arrested since the institution of the PA.

2- National Reconciliation Party

This party was established on 5 February 1996 after President Arafat endorsed the initiative. The party obtained its legal permit on 20 July 1997 and started to expand in all the regions of the country.  Its members organised several activities, yet some began to fabricate internal disputes against the leadership of the party. Those members later confessed that they were pushed to create those problems by the Palestinian Security Services, according to the chairman of the party Nazmi al-Shanti in his interview with PHRMG.

Al-Shanti continued, “So the party met and decided to dismiss those members who were behind the dissension.  This was announced on the front page of al-Hayat al-Jadida newspaper on 24 October 1998.

However, at this point we were surprised when the Ministry of Interior re-appointed the dismissed members as “group leadership” despite the decision of dismissal taken by the general assembly of the party.

We, as founders of the party and legitimate leaders, tried to contact the Assistant Deputy Minister of Interior Zakaria Abdel-Rahim, who called for new elections on 23 November 1998. Although that was contradicting the basic constitution of the party, we agreed. We had no choice.

But on the day of the elections, and with most of the members of the general assembly present, Zakaria Abdel-Rahim postponed the matter further to 29 January 1999, and we had to agree in order to save our party. After that, there was a long discussion regarding who does and does not have the right to vote in the elections. We never came to agreement with the Ministry of Interior, despite the fact that all details are clear in the internal constitution of the party. We tried to meet with deputy Minister of Interior Amad Bayoud Tamimi, but he refused to meet with us. So we wrote to President Arafat, and to his general secretary Tayeb Abdel-Rahim, but we received no reply. Then we were surprised to read the decision issued by the Ministry of Interior to dissolve the party. It was published in all three daily newspapers -- al-Quds, al-Ayyam and al-Hayat on three consecutive days, 19-21 February 1999, on the basis that “the party violated its basic constitution."

Loyal members of the party tried very hard to protest against this unjust decision, and we contacted various senior officials trying to explain our position with no success. So we approached the High Court of Justice to complain against the decision of the Ministry of Interior, but the case was postponed three times -- first on 23 February 1999, then on 18 September 1999, then on 4 November 1999. Now they say they will give their final decision at the end of February 2000.

A Letter of Congratulations

 A Condolence Letter

Our Profile  I News &  Events I The Monitor  I Resources I Links I Subscriptions I Home