|
Case studies
1.
‘Alan Bani Odeh
24, from Tammoun village near Jenin
Sentenced to death and executed by the PA on 13 January 2001
‘Alan Bani
Odeh was suspected of collaboration with Israel and, in particular, of
having provided information to the Israeli General Security Services (GSS)
leading to the assassination of his distant cousin, Ibrahim Bani Odeh. On
23 November 2000, Ibrahim Bani Odeh was killed in Nablus when his car
exploded. According to Palestinian sources, a bomb had been hidden in the
headrest of his car by the Israeli GSS, and detonated by remote control.
They claimed the operation could only have been possible with the help and
collaboration of ‘Alan Bani Odeh.
‘Alan Bani Odeh was arrested by the Palestinian
security services on 29 November 2000, possibly abducted from inside
Israel, although the PHRMG was unable to confirm this information.
According to the indictment, ‘Alan Bani Odeh gave his car to an Israeli
officer on Thursday 23 November 2000, then was told to give the car to
Ibrahim, and then go to meet some Israelis near the village of Qussein. He
was allegedly taken from there to Haifa.
On 7 December 2000, after a trial that lasted less
than three hours, the State Security Court of Nablus sentenced ‘Alan Bani
Odeh to death by hanging. The Court appointed two defense attorneys
shortly before trial and rejected their request to postpone the
proceedings so that they could prepare their case. The attorneys were
given only 15 minutes to look at the case during an adjournment of the
court session. ‘Alan Bani Odeh admitted having been recruited in February
2000 by the GSS, who had discovered that he was having an affair with a
young woman. However, he adamantly denied the charges regarding the death
of Ibrahim, claiming he had offered to turn himself in to the Preventive
Security Service since he thought he would never be suspected in
connection with the murder.
‘Alan Bani Odeh was executed by firing squad on 13
January 2001 at 11 am, in the Police Headquarters in Nablus. His close
relatives did not attend the execution and refused to bury his body. At
the same time, another alleged collaborator, Majdy Mohammed Mikkawi, was
executed by firing squad in Gaza. He was accused of having supplied the
GSS with information about Jamal Abdel Razek, a Fatah activist
assassinated by Israeli forces in Gaza on 22 November 2000.
Comments:
‘Alan Bani Odeh was arrested in connection with the
assassination of his distant cousin Ibrahim Bani Odeh. His charge is
typical of those of suspected collaborators arrested by Palestinian
security forces during the al-Aqsa Intifada. In the aftermath of
assassinations, usually the same day, the Palestinian security forces
round up sometimes more than a dozen suspects for interrogation in
connection with the assassination. The arrest of ‘Alan Bani Odeh took
place six days after the assassination of Ibrahim, possibly because he had
taken refuge in Haifa, Israel, but this information could not be
confirmed. As with all cases of alleged collaboration, the investigation
leading to ‘Alan Bani Odeh’s indictment and punishment was conducted with
surprising speed. Only eight days after his arrest, the Palestinian
Security Services had somehow accumulated sufficient evidence to enable
the State Security Court in Nablus to sentence ‘Alan Bani Odeh to death.
Created by presidential decree in 1995, the State
Security Courts are an intrinsically un-democratic institution, which do
not respect the most basic guarantees for a fair trial. As noted above, in
the case of Bani Odeh, defense attorneys were appointed by the Court
shortly before the trial, and were given only fifteen minutes to review
the case, since the Court rejected their request to postpone the
proceedings. Under such circumstances, it is clear that ‘Alan Bani Odeh
was not given a chance to present a credible defense, an extremely serious
defect, since the court chose to impose a death sentence that would be
carried out two weeks later. Decisions of the State Security Courts cannot
be appealed. The PHRMG was unable to obtain a copy of the court
proceedings.
Bani Odeh and Mikkawi are the two only suspected
collaborators whose death sentences were approved by Yasser Arafat,
Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, and who have been executed.
Following these executions, the Palestinian Authority became the target of
massive criticism from the international community, especially from the
European Community. 9 Palestinians
sentenced to death for collaboration are awaiting execution in Palestinian
Authority prisons.
2.
Hassan Mohammed Yousef Musallam
53, from Fawar refugee camp, Hebron
Sentenced to 20 years imprisonment on 20 April 2001
His wife Salam Hani Sahawneh told the PHRMG on 13
February 2001:
“My husband Hassan
returned with the Palestinian Authority to Jericho in 1994, where he
worked in the National Security Service. In June 1994, a family dispute
broke out with the Rajoub family, and members of the two families were
taken to Jericho for investigation. There, Hassan met with Mousa al-Rajoub
and they became friends. Through Mousa al-Rajoub, Hassan came in contact
with the Israelis and after that he moved to al-Sheikh neighborhood in
Hebron, close to the Martyrs Cemetery.
On 20 November 2000,
while he was going to work, some men from the Palestinian General
Intelligence Service arrested him and took him to their headquarters. They
interrogated him about things that I don’t know. He was there for two
months and they didn’t allow us to visit him. Then he was transferred to
the Military Intelligence service on 20 January 2001, where they charged
him with collaboration with the enemy and betraying the military service.
After they confronted him with the allegations of Mousa al-Rajoub, Hassan
admitted that he worked as an informer with the Israelis in 1994 but only
for four months. The Military Intelligence allowed us to visit him in
prison, and [Hassan] told me they didn’t torture him.”
As a captain of the Palestinian National Guard,
Musallam was tried in front of a Military Court on 11 February 2001 and
was defended by two lawyers appointed by the Court. He was accused of
collaborating with Israel since 1994 and more specifically, of providing
the Israelis with information about the Palestinian security services, and
about Palestinians who fired upon the Israeli army and settlers in the Old
City of Hebron. The handwritten charges also state that he twice received
NIS 1,800 from the Israeli GSS for his services. Local newspapers added
that he had deliberately fired at Israeli soldiers in Hebron in November
2000 to give the Israeli army a pretext for firing at Palestinian
neighborhoods. He was sentenced to death, pending ratification by the
president of the Palestinian Authority. Musallam claims he is innocent. On
20 April 2001, his lawyer presented an appeal that was accepted, and
Musallam’s sentence was commuted to 20 years in prison.
On 10 April 2001, his wife left the country and
moved to Jordan with her children because of the hostility she faced in
her Hebron neighborhood.
Comments:
As a member of the Palestinian security forces,
Musallam did not fall under the jurisdiction of the State Security Courts
and was tried by a Military Court in which the right to appeal a decision
is ensured. Most lawyers in Hebron refused to defend him. The stigma
attached to collaboration is so strong that lawyers are reluctant to
accept such cases, because there is very little sympathy among fellow
Palestinians for suspected collaborators. Moreover, lawyers fear that they
will themselves be branded as collaborators if they try to defend alleged
collaborators. Finally, many lawyers are convinced that whatever efforts
they might undertake will be useless. As a matter of fact, the Palestinian
Bar Association issued oral instructions forbidding Palestinian lawyers
from defending suspected collaborators. In some cases, judges appointed to
rule on cases of collaboration cannot find defense attorneys, and
attorneys affiliated with the PA security system have to be appointed. The
lack of legal representation is one of the most serious problems that
suspected collaborators face in the Palestinian judicial system.
But what is more, Musallam’s charge of
collaboration was substantiated in the local newspapers by a rather
peculiar accusation: the popular belief is that he deliberately fired at
Israeli soldiers in Hebron in order to give the Israeli army a pretext for
opening fire on Palestinian civilian neighborhoods. Since the beginning of
the al-Aqsa Intifada, the Israeli army has claimed it only “returns fire”
when it shoots at Palestinian residential areas in Hebron from tanks and
helicopters. This thesis prompted Palestinians to suspect that certain
Palestinian gunmen were actually contracted by the Israelis to open fire,
so as to give the Israeli army an excuse to fire back. This rumor spread
in Hebron, and probably led to the death penalty pronounced against
Musallam. No proof has ever been offered of the existence of such an
elaborate plot, but Palestinian courts are very responsive to popular
sentiment and pressure.
Social ostracism is also a very serious problem for
relatives of suspected collaborators. Musallam’s wife and children
suffered from isolation and humiliation in their neighborhood beginning
the day of his arrest, and the pressure became so unbearable that they
eventually decided to leave the country.
3.
Salem Mahmoud al-Aqra’
37, from Qabalan, near Nablus
Died in Palestinian custody on 26 February 2001
Salem al-Aqra’ was arrested on 6 February 2001 by
the Military Intelligence Service in Nablus for “security reasons.” One of
Salem’s cousins was also detained with him. He said that he used to hear
Salem at night crying and weeping from pain. Salem was prevented from
receiving any visits, whether from his family or from a lawyer. He died in
custody on 26 February 2001, and his body was taken to Rafidia Hospital.
Eyewitnesses report that there were clear marks of torture on different
parts of his body. Local newspapers subsequently reported that he was
suspected of collaboration with Israeli authorities, and that two other
detainees from his village confessed that he had worked with them in the
interests of the Israeli authorities.
The family first
refused to take the body. On 28 February 2001, after the death of Salem
was announced, a group of his relatives and young men from Fatah movement
met with the Palestinian Authority Governor of Nablus, Mahmoud al-‘Aloul,
to demand a rapid investigation of the case and publication of its
findings. The Fatah movement in Nablus also issued a communiqué
confirming that Salem al-Aqra’ was a decent and nationalistic man who
always supported the national struggle against the Israeli occupation, and
asked that he be considered a martyr. The local Fatah group called upon
President Yasser Arafat to form a committee to investigate his death, and
bring those responsible to trial.
That same day, the
body was taken to Abu Dis for autopsy. A few days later, on 2 March 2001,
the family finally agreed to receive the body and al-Aqra’ was buried,
before any details concerning the cause of his death could be uncovered.
Comments:
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” (Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, art. 5)
Five Palestinians have
died in Palestinian custody since the beginning of the al-Aqsa intifada,
four of whom were suspected of collaboration. Twenty-eight Palestinians
have died in custody since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority
in 1994, and, according to PHRMG’s information, at least half of these
cases were those of suspected collaborators. The issue of death in
Palestinian custody is obviously linked to the use of torture by the
Palestinian security services, and suspected collaborators seem to be
particularly vulnerable to this abuse.
“Torturing Palestinian
victims in PNA jails and detention centers at the hands of the various
Palestinian Security Forces, has become a daily routine,” wrote the PHRMG
in a 1998 report on torture. Unfortunately, the situation has not changed
since then. Torture in Palestinian detention facilities is common
practice. Torture can take several forms, both psychological – such as
long periods of solitary confinement – and physical – such as beatings,
shabeh (shackling in painful positions), cigarette burns, etc. Torture
seems to be used particularly in the initial phase of interrogation, and
death in custody usually occurs during the first week following arrest.
All Palestinian security forces seem to be involved, although during the
al-Aqsa intifada, three out of five cases of death in custody occurred in
facilities run by the Palestinian Military Intelligence, a security
service headed by Musa Arafat.
Suspected collaborators
are undoubtedly vulnerable to such abuse. However, it appears that in many
instances, Palestinian security services have also used the label of
collaboration to “justify” post facto cases of death in custody in
the eyes of the population. Because collaborators are so despised, the
Palestinian people show much less concern about abuse committed against
them by the security forces. The security forces can therefore avoid an
investigation of the incident, or at least ensure that investigation will
not lead to any disciplinary measures being taken. This could well have
been the case with Salem al-Aqra’.
On 19 November 2001,
while preparing this report, the PHRMG wrote to Palestinian
Attorney-General Zouhair al-Sourani to inquire whether an investigation
had been opened into al-Aqra’s death, whether any conclusions had been
reached and if any measures had been taken following the incident. No
response has been received to date.
4.
Mohammed Khalid al-Daghamin
25, from Hebron (he had Israeli citizenship)
Killed on 10 April 2001 by fellow inmates in Megiddo prison
Mohammed al-Daghamin was a construction worker,
living in Lod, inside Israel who only rarely returned to his hometown of
Hebron. He was married to an Israeli-Arab woman and therefore had Israeli
citizenship. On 15 April 2000, he was arrested by the Palestinian
Preventive Security for belonging to the Islamic Jihad movement, but he
was released two weeks later, as the Palestinian security services are
forbidden under bilateral agreements to detain Israeli citizens. According
to testimony given to the PHRMG by Mohammed’s brother, the rumor spread at
the time that Mohammed was a collaborator.
On 5 April 2001, Mohammed was caught in Jerusalem
by the Israeli police and was charged with planning to kidnap an Israeli
soldier. He told the police that he had wanted to obtain the release of
several Palestinian prisoners in exchange. On 17 April, 2001, his brother
Ahmad (29) related to the PHRMG what happened next:
“On 10 April 2001 we received a phone call from
the administration of Megiddo Prison, saying that my brother Mohammed, who
was detained there, had been killed inside the prison by other prisoners.
His body was taken to Abu-Kabir Hospital. We were shocked because Mohammed
was decent and religious. He was known for having the principles of Hamas
movement, and he often prayed in the mosque. - - - Abu-Kabir Hospital
reported that Mohammed was strangled, and he was not tortured. His body
was given to the family on 14 April 2001 and he was buried in the evening.
The family demands that investigation be carried out on how my brother was
killed and the reasons for that.”
Comments:
Palestinians view with suspicion any contacts with
Israelis, such as Israeli citizenship and work or residence inside Israel,
and al-Daghamin certainly had the profile of a potential collaborator. As
a matter of fact, Israeli citizenship is sometimes granted as a reward to
Palestinians who have collaborated with the Israeli GSS. It can well be
that al-Daghamin’s plan to kidnap an Israeli soldier was just a desperate
attempt to clear his name and prove to other Palestinians that he was a
good, “nationalistic” man, in spite of the citizenship he bore.
When a Palestinian detainee held by Israel is
suspected of collaboration by other inmates, he will usually be
interrogated by prisoners belonging to one or the other Palestinian cells
represented in that particular prison. Forty-four Palestinians were killed
in Israeli detention during the first intifada under suspicion of
collaboration, mainly inside Ketziot detention center. B’Tselem explained
in its 1994 report on collaborators the decision-making and execution
procedure in detention centers at that time:
The
names of suspected collaborators are normally received from sources
outside the facility, on minute notes smuggled into the center by
visitors. When the suspect’s name is received, a meeting is held of a
committee consisting of three or four inmates, who decide whether he is to
be interrogated. The committee’s decision is recorded on a sheet of paper.
The paper is tied to a stone which is thrown into the wing where the
suspect is held. The next stage is to extract a confession from the
suspect, normally through torture. The suspect generally also suffers from
abuse by the other inmates in the wing. On Friday, after prayers, the
committee meets and decides on the sentence and how it is to be
implemented: strangulation using a towel or bare hands, blows to the head
with the fists, or a severe beating of the entire body. After the
execution is carried out, the body is left outside the tent, and one of
the inmates accepts responsibility for the deed vis-à-vis the
prison authorities. Normally this will be a man who is inside for a long
time.
Following the same pattern, it seems that
al-Daghamin was interrogated inside Megiddo detention center by
Palestinian inmates belonging to Hamas movement. As far as is known, he
did not reveal anything, but he was killed nevertheless.
This killing is obviously problematic since
al-Daghamin’s “guilt” could not possibly have been proven. But beyond
this, al-Daghamin’s death also reveals a severe shortcoming of the Israeli
prison authorities. Israel is responsible for the life and security of
Palestinian inmates held in Israeli prisons. If al-Daghamin was suspected
of collaboration, the prison authorities could have predicted that there
would be an attempt on his life and he should have been placed in
protective custody.
On 19 November 2001, during the preparation of this
report, the PHRMG wrote to the Israeli army spokesperson to inquire
whether an investigation had been opened into al-Daghamin’s death, what
its conclusions were, and what are the standard measures, if any, taken to
protect Palestinian inmates from retribution by other inmates. No response
has been received to date.
5.
Ahmed Shawkat Salah
29, from al-Khader, Bethlehem district
Killed on 2 August 2001 in al-Khader by masked men
His brother Ayman told the PHRMG on 4 August 2001:
“On Wednesday 2 August 2001 between 8:30 and 9 am,
I was sitting with two friends outside the house, on the main road,
opposite my brother Ahmad. We were 10 meters away from Ahmad. Suddenly, a
white Subaru Legacy car with yellow (Jerusalem) license plates approached,
stopped opposite Ahmad, then turned around and came very close to him. I
heard 3 shots and the car drove away. I hurried to see Ahmad, who was
wounded in his chest and neck. I ran after the car but it was fast and
drove past the checkpoint of the National Security, 50 meters away from
the house, without any attempt by the Palestinian soldiers at the
checkpoint to stop it.”
The reputation of collaboration that Ahmed Shawkat
Salah bore – which eventually cost him his life – had its roots at the end
of the first intifada. On 7 December 1995, the mukhtar of the village of
al-Khader, ‘Adel Sbeih, was murdered. He was an open collaborator, and
such murders were common during the first intifada. But some two weeks
later, Bethlehem became part of the Palestinian Autonomous Areas, and the
family of the mukhtar filed a complaint with the Palestinian Military
Intelligence for his murder, possibly in an attempt to clear his name. The
Military Intelligence then brought a sheikh from the neighboring village
of Zeita to assist in uncovering the murderers. Using a fortune telling
method known in Arabic as “mandal,” the sheikh “discovered” the names of
the people who murdered the mukhtar.
In May and June 1996,
the Military Intelligence division led by Colonel W. arrested the nine men
indicated by the sheikh. Ahmed Shawkat Salah was one of them. The men were
interrogated for three months, and were allowed visits neither from family
nor from lawyers. Ahmed Salah gave the PHRMG the following testimony about
what happened at the time:
“They took me to
the barracks at dawn. The investigators told the soldiers: ‘get up, here
is the meat!’ The soldiers got up – I don’t remember how many they were –
and started to beat me all over my body. The next day in the cell, the
second day, I was taken to W’s office where they took my clothes off and
tried to rape me but my screams prevented them. W told them to take me to
the ‘slaughter house’ where I was tied to a ladder by my hands and feet,
and they inserted a police baton into my rectum. At that moment I signed
the confession.”
Testimonies collected
from the other men arrested together with Salah tell similar stories of
confessions obtained under duress. In addition, two of the defendants had
to be transferred to the hospital at some point for medical treatment for
injuries sustained from the torture.
On 5 December 1996,
charges were filed against the nine defendants. The charge sheet was
written by then Bethlehem prosecutor Ahmed al-Toubasi. The nine men were
accused of having committed a series of murders between 1991 and 1994 on
behalf of the Israeli GSS. In other words, they were accused of
collaboration. On 7 February 1997, Palestinian Minister of Justice Freih
Abu Middein told the Palestinian Legislative Council in Bethlehem that the
“al-Khader nine” would be released within 48 hours because they were
completely innocent. The nine defendants however remained in Jericho
prison, and the first session of the trial was held on 13 April 1997 in
the District Court in Ramallah. The defendants were able to prove, through
corroborated alibis, that they were innocent of the charges. On 25 March
1998, the Ramallah Court of First Instance found that the confessions had
been obtained under duress, and therefore invalid, and acquitted the
defendants and ordered their release.
Despite the fact that
a Palestinian court found them innocent of the charge of collaboration, a
media campaign had been waging during the trial, presenting the al-Khader
nine as collaborators. Flyers were distributed in al-Khader and Bethlehem,
and the local television stations further disseminated the allegations.
The popular jury decided that the nine men were guilty. On 2 August 2001,
the popular sentence against Ahmed Shawkat Salah was executed, as he was
shot in front of his house in al-Khader.
Comments:
“Everyone charged with a penal offence has the
right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a
public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his
trial” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, art. 11)
“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and
security of person.” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948,
art. 3)
The death of Ahmed
Salah illustrates well how poorly those two principles of human rights are
respected by the Palestinian Authority. Ahmed Salah was charged with
collaboration in 1996, in an indictment based on dubious evidence and a
confession obtained under duress. The Ramallah Court of First Instance
recognized in its ruling of March 1998 that Ahmed Salah was indeed
innocent of the charges. However, throughout the trial and before the
Court had issued its verdict, the local media in Bethlehem was permitted
to conduct a ferocious campaign of defamation against Salah and the other
al-Khader nine. All nine were presented as collaborators, as if this was a
hard fact, and this allegation tarnished their reputation from then on.
“Collaboration” is a heavy stigma to bear in Palestine. As the level of
violence within the Palestinian society rose during the al-Aqsa Intifada,
Ahmed Salah paid for it with his life.
The Palestinian
Authority did nothing to prevent or prosecute his murder. When Ahmed Salah
was killed, the car with his attackers drove past a checkpoint of the
Palestinian National Security, 50 meters away from the house, but the
Palestinian soldiers made no attempt to stop it. On 15 November 2001, the
PHRMG wrote to Palestinian Police Chief Ghazi al-Jabali to inquire about
the status of the investigation, but no response has been received to
date. To our knowledge, no investigation has been opened into this murder,
and no arrests have been made. The signal sent by the Palestinian
Authority is that collaborators – real or imagined – can be murdered with
total impunity. Twenty-four suspected collaborators have been killed in
the street since the beginning of the al-Aqsa Intifada.
|
