Nafha prison authority cancels relatives' visits

[ 23/01/2011 - 07:19 PM ]

NABLUS, (PIC)-- The Israeli administration of the Nafha desert prison told the Red Cross on Sunday that it would not allow visits by relatives of detainees until further notice. Miyasar Atiyani, an activist in prisoners' affairs, said in a press release that the ban was a penal measure against the prisoners for waging a hunger strike for two days. She added that 360 prisoners from the Gaza Strip in Nafha have been deprived of family visits for four years along with 120 others from the West Bank. In another development related to the Palestinian prisoners, Ra'fat Hamdona, the director of the prisoners' center for studies, said in a statement on Saturday that the Israeli higher court's decision about the secret prison 1391 legitimized violations inside it. The court ruled against uncovering the secrets of that jail. He urged the world community to protect the Palestinian prisoners from the escalating Israeli violations.

Rights groups condemn Israel's refusal to close top secret prison

[ 22/01/2011 - 08:01 AM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- Rights groups are condemning an Israeli Supreme Court decision refusing to shut down Israel's most top secret investigation center. Those organizations are the Mandela prisoner care foundation, the Palestinian Prisoner Committee in the West Bank, the Prisoner Friend Society, and Nazareth Prisoner Affairs Follow-up Committee and the Siddiq Yousef prisoner care foundation in Umm Al-Fahm. Two petitions were filed against the 1391 detention center, which resides on a secret military base and is directly affiliated with the Israeli intelligence. According to the prisoner rights groups, Israel has refused to admit the center exists. It is not subject to regulations by the Red Cross or other global organizations. The Israeli daily Haaretz first shed light on the center in 2003 after the Israeli army took several Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners without anyone knowing about their existence or the existence of the center. Haaretz quoted petitioners as saying the court agreed to place restrictions on the period of detention allowed in the center, provide specific information on its location to the detainees themselves, and to use it exclusively on orders of senior leadership.

PA: UN wants Israel to admit secret prison

Published Sunday 22/11/2009 (updated) 25/11/2009 21:35

Ramallah – Ma’an – The UN has sent an official request to Israel to admit the existence of secret prison camp 1391, dubbed in the press “Israel’s Guantanamo Bay,” according to the Palestinian Authority minister of prisoners affairs.

Minister Issa Qaraqe told a news conference in Ramallah on Saturday that the UN had asked the Israeli government in a letter to officially acknowledge that the facility.

Human rights experts with the United Nations Committee Against Torture questioned Israeli officials about the facility in may when the country came up for a regular review under a treaty obligation, Reuters reported.

Although Israel declined the UN’s request to discuss 1391 earlier this year, Israeli officials have indirectly confirmed the facility's existence. Former Israeli Justice Minister Dan Merridor told the Haaretz newspaper that he was aware of the site but never visited it.

News reports say that Israel has held Palestinians, Lebanese, and other Arabs at the site. The detention of Palestinians there reportedly increased during the second intifada. Former inmates told the Guardian newspaper that they were held in black, windowless cells with little light.

After being detained and transported to the prison wearing hoods, prisoners said they were told they were “in Honolulu,” “outside the borders of Israel,” or “on the moon,” the newspaper said. The government has even airbrushed ariel photographs and altered maps to conceal the facility’s existence, according to the report.

In interviews with the Israeli and foreign press, former prisoners have also reported cases of rape, prolonged nudity, and tactics regarded as torture. Unlike other Israeli prisons, the Red Cross is not allowed to visit the facility.

Prisoner release?

Asked about Israeli news reports that the country could release Palestinian prisoners ahead of the Muslim Eid Al-Adha holiday next week, Qaraqe said that the PA has not received any official information on the subject. He added that Israel has decided to release prisoners in the past without informing the PA, and that it’s possible that some could be freed.

Qaraqe also spoke about the Palestinian Authority-sponsored conference on the plight of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails which will be held in Jericho on Tuesday. He said forty people and thirteen institutions will participate in the summit, which will address subjects such as the torture of women and children, prisoners’ rights, and efforts to seek international designation of the Palestinian detainees as prisoners of war, not terrorists.

Qaraqe was also asked about the health condition of a detainee named Nahed Al-Aqra, who was accused of blowing up an Israeli tank in Gaza. Qaraqe responded, “The ministry is following up the difficult health condition of Al-Aqra. The ministry also entered a petition with the High Court of Justice demanding his release along with that of other sick prisoners including Akram Mansour.” He also said that the Red Cross is working for the release of ill prisoners.

Farwana: "All facts on the ground prove Swedish report correct"

Saturday August 22, 2009 00:05 by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies

Former Palestinian detainee, researcher Abdul-Nasser Farwana, stated that all facts on the ground, since decades, prove that the Israeli occupation executed Palestinian detainees after they surrendered and refused to hand their bodies to their families. Hundreds of bodies were transferred to the families days, months or even years after the fact, and when the bodies were sent back, they were missing vital internal organs.

Bilal AhmadGhanan, 19,Photo: Donald Boström

Farwana added that the Swedish report, written by Donald Boström and published by Aftonbladet Swedish paper, regarding illegal trafficking of body parts of Palestinians is directly connected to the execution of Palestinians after they surrendered to the army, and is connected with the arrest of 40 well-known figures, including Rabbis in New Jersey for money laundering and corruption, in a scheme that involved sales of Israeli kidneys in the US and other corruption rackets.

Farwana added that one of the illegal acts carried out by Israel is having secret detention facilities in which dozens of detainees were imprisoned and never heard of anymore. This is in addition to the “Numbers Graveyard” in which “unknown” Palestinian and Arab fighters are buried.

He said that Israel still denies it is holding hundreds of Palestinian and Arab fighter, and refuses to cooperate with the Red Cross on the issue.

The researcher added that Israel is the only state that had a policy of detaining the bodies of slain Arab and Palestinian fighters, and that some 300 fighters are buried in the numbers graveyard.

Hundreds of bodies were returned during prisoner-swap deals, including the latest swap-deal between Hezbollah and Israel in which some 200 bodies were moved to Lebanon.

Farwana further said that dozens of detainees died in Israeli prisons, some due to torture, and their bodies were not immediately sent to their families, but instead were moved to forensic center, and some of their body parts were removed before bodies were sent back to the Palestinians.

He said the Swedish paper said in its report that Palestinians youth were abducted by the Israeli army from their homes, were killed later on, and when their bodies were return, they were cut open and vital organs were missing.

Rabbi Levi Yitzhak Rosenberg, who was recently arrested in New York, is believed to be involved in illegal trade of organs, and that he sold Kidney to patients in the United States for 160.000 USD.

The Aftonbladet report placed the Israeli-Swedish relations at odds, and some Israel officials demanded Sweden to officially apologize, while other officials said that this report in part of the efforts to demonize Israel and the Jews.

This is the link for the full Aftonbladet report, in English, with pictures attached http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=8390&lg=en

Sweden’s Foreign Ministry summons Israel’s ambassador

Saturday August 22, 2009 05:20 by Saed Bannoura - IMEMC & Agencies

As the Israeli-Swedish relations stand at odds over an article regarding Israeli soldiers killing Palestinians for their organs, and Israel’s demand for official apology, the Swedish government summoned the Israeli Ambassador for talks on the issue.

Swedish Ambassador in Israel - Carl Bildt

Israeli officials reported that comments made by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman also caused anger in Sweden as he said that Sweden did nothing while the Nazis were killing the Jews.

Israeli online daily, Haaretz, reported that the meeting was scheduled even before the article was published, but would now focus on it as its causing tension between the two countries.

Lieberman said that this article is part of what he described as “defamation of the Jews”, and connected to the Swedish stance during World War II “When it failed to intervene”.

Israel demanded the Swedish Foreign Minister, Carl Bildt, to condemn the article, but he refused to issue an official statement in this regard.

Bildt said that the article was published because Freedom of Expression is part of the Swedish Constitution.

He said that he can understand why the article is causing this anger and emotions in Israel, but it is part of the freedom of speech.

Israel says that the article is racist, but Sweden said that the only issue that united the Swedish parliament at all times is the condemnation of anti-Semitism.

Haaretz said that the Israeli Foreign Ministry knows that it is unlikely that Sweden would publish a condemnation, and therefore it is studying a number of measures including canceling the visit of Bildt who is expected in Tel Aviv after 10 days.

Another idea is to allow Bildt into the country but have him publicly slam the article and to have Israeli officials refusing to speak to him on any issue except the article.

Israel insists on a public official apology from Sweden while several Israeli officials said that there is no other way to resolve the issue.

Lieberman had already instructed Foreign Ministry employees not to grant press cards to Aftonbladet reporters, and to refuse to assist in covering news from Israel.

Israel is also weighing the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the author of the article, Donald BOSTRÖM.

Report of the Committee against Torture

read full report here
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/cobs/CAT.C.ISR.CO.4.pdf


Distr.
GENERAL
CAT/C/ISR/CO/4
14 May 2009
Original: ENGLISH
COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE Forty-second session Geneva, 27 April-15 May 2009

ADVANCED UNEDITED VERSION

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION

Concluding Observations of the Committee against Torture

ISRAEL

1. The Committee considered the fourth periodic report of Israel (CAT/C/ISR/4) at its 878th and 881st meetings (CAT/C/SR.878 and 881), held on 5 and 6 May 2009, and adopted, at its 893rd meeting (CAT/C/SR.893), the following concluding observations.

A. Introduction
2. The Committee welcomes the submission of the fourth periodic report of Israel, which is in conformity with the Committee’s guidelines for reporting.
3. The Committee expresses its appreciation for the extensive written responses to its list of issues (CAT/C/ISR/Q/4/Add.1), which provided important additional information, and for the oral responses to the numerous questions raised and concerns expressed during the consideration of the report. The Committee also appreciates the expert delegation of the State party and the open and comprehensive dialogue conducted.

B. Positive aspects
4. The Committee welcomes that, in the period since the consideration of the last periodic report, the State party has ratified the following instruments:
a) the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict and
b) the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
5. The Committee notes with appreciation the decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel on the case Yisacharov v The Head Military Prosecutor et. al., C.A. 5121/98; which calls for the exclusion of a confession or evidence obtained unlawfully or in violation of a defendant’s right to fair procedure; and the case Physicians for Human Rights et al. v. Minister of Public Security, HCJ 4634/04, declaring that the State of Israel must provide a bed to every prisoner held in an Israeli prison as a basic condition for living in dignity.
6. The Committee also notes with appreciation the enactment of the Israel Security Agency Law 5762-2002, regulating the mandate, scope and function of this institution and regularizing its activities so that it is supervised by and reports to a Ministerial Committee and other official bodies.
7. The appointment of the Israel Prison Service as the authority in charge of many Israeli detention facilities, some of which were formerly controlled by the military and the police.
8. Additionally, the Committee welcomes the State party’s affirmation that training concerning the Convention and the prohibition of torture is conducted in courses for security, police and military officials, including with regard to the Supreme Court’s 1999 ruling on the prohibition on torture, affirming that “these prohibitions are ‘absolute’. There are no exceptions to them and there is no room for balancing.”
9. The Committee also notes again, with appreciation, the way in which public debate ensues on such sensitive matters as torture and ill-treatment of detainees, both in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. It welcomes the State party’s cooperation with non-governmental organizations that provide relevant reports and information to the Committee and encourages the State party to further strengthen its cooperation with them with regard to the monitoring and implementation of the provisions of the Convention. In this connection, the Committee also notes with appreciation the prompt judicial review of persons under detention upon their petition to the Supreme Court, and the role of non-governmental organizations in facilitating and lodging such appeals.
C. Factors and difficulties impeding the application of the Convention
10. The Committee is fully aware of the situation of unrest prevailing in Israel and in the occupied Palestinian territories. The Committee reiterates its recognition of the State party’s legitimate security concerns and its duty to protect its citizens and all persons under its jurisdiction or de facto control from violence. However, the Committee further recalls the absolute nature of the prohibition of torture contained in article 2, paragraph 2 of the Convention, stating that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be invoked as a justification of torture.”
11. The Committee notes the State party’s continued argument that the Convention is not applicable to the West Bank or the Gaza Strip, and the claim that this position stems inter alia from longstanding legal considerations that encompass the original drafting history of the Convention as well as from changed practical developments since Israel’s last appearance before the committee, including the 2005 withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, the dismantling of its military government and its evacuation of over 8,500 civilians from Gaza. In addition, it notes the State party’s argument that the ‘law of armed conflict’ is the lex specialis legal regime that takes precedence. However, the Committee recalls its General Comment No 2
that State parties’ obligation to prevent acts of torture or ill-treatment in any territory under its jurisdiction must be interpreted and applied to protect any person, citizen or non-citizen, without discrimination subject to the de jure of de facto control of a State party. The Committee further notes (i) that the State party and its personnel have repeatedly entered and established control over the West Bank and Gaza; (ii) that, as acknowledged by the State party’s representatives during the dialogue with the Committee, security detainees from the area are, in substantial numbers, detained in prisons within the boundaries of the State of Israel; and (iii) that Israel admittedly maintains “full jurisdiction” over cases of violence in the territories by Israeli settlers against Palestinians. Thus, the State party maintains control and jurisdiction in many aspects on the occupied Palestinian territories. Furthermore, the Committee notes with appreciation the State party’s affirmation that “an Israeli official is liable to Israel’s criminal jurisdiction for any unlawful conduct committed inside or outside the territory of Israel, provided that the official operates within his official capacity.” As to the lex specialis argument, the Committee recalls that it considers that the application of the Convention’s provisions are without prejudice to the provisions of any other international instrument, pursuant to paragraph 2 of its articles 1 and 16. Additionally, the Committee considers that, as stated by the International Court of Justice in its Advisory Opinion, international human rights treaties ratified by the State party, including the Convention, are applicable in the occupied Palestinian territories.1
12. In any event, the Committee notes that the State party has acknowledged that its actions in the West Bank and Gaza warrant scrutiny. It also notes that the State party has responded to and elaborated on many questions regarding the West Bank and Gaza posed by the Committee in the written List of Issues and the oral discussion.

D. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations

Definition of torture
13. The Committee notes the State party’s explanation that all acts of torture are criminal acts under Israeli law. Nevertheless, the Committee reiterates its concern expressed in its previous concluding observations that a crime of torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention has not been incorporated into Israeli domestic legislation.
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation that a crime of torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention be incorporated into the domestic law of Israel.
Defense of ‘Necessity’
14. Notwithstanding the State party’s assurances that following the Supreme Court’s decision in H.C.J. 5100/94, Public Committee against Torture in Israel v. The State of Israel determined that the prohibition on the use of ‘brutal or inhuman means’ is absolute, and its affirmation that ‘necessity defense’ is not a source of authority for an interrogator’s use of physical means, the Committee remains concerned that the ‘necessity defense’ exception may still arise in cases of ‘ticking bombs,’ i.e., interrogation of terrorist suspects or persons otherwise holding information about potential terrorist attacks. The Committee further notes with concern that, under Section 18
1 International Court of Justice, Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Advisory opinion of 9 July 2004.
of the Israel Security Agency Law 5762-2002, “an ISA employee (…) shall not bear criminal or civil responsibility for any act or omission performed in good faith and reasonably by him within the scope and in performance of his function”. Although the State party reported that Section 18 has not been applied to a single case, the Committee is concerned that ISA interrogators who use physical pressure in “ticking bomb” cases may not be criminally responsible if they resort to the necessity defense argument. According to official data published in July 2002, 90 Palestinian detainees had been interrogated under the “ticking bomb” exception since September 1999.
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation that the State party completely remove necessity as a possible justification for the crime of torture. The Committee requests that the State party provide detailed information on the number of “ticking bomb” Palestinian detainees interrogated since 2002.
Basic Safeguards for Detainees
15. The Committee is concerned that while the Criminal Procedure Law and the Prisons Ordinance stipulate conditions under which detainees are entitled to meet promptly with a lawyer, these can be delayed, subject to written requests, if it puts the investigation at risk, prevents disclosure of evidence, or obstructs the arrest of additional suspects, and security-related offenses or terrorism charges permit further delays. Notwithstanding the safeguards provided by law and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court of Israel in its 2006 decision on the case Yisacharov v The Head Military Prosecutor et. al., C.A. 5121/98 for ordinary cases, there are repeated claims of insufficient legal safeguards for security detainees. The Committee also notes with concern that the Criminal Procedure Law-2006 allows detention for up to 96 hours of persons suspected of security offenses before being brought before a judge -although the State Party claims a majority of cases are brought within 14 hours- and up to 21 days without access to a lawyer- despite the State Party’s claim that more than 10 days is “seldom used”.
The Committee calls upon Israel to examine its legislation and policies in order to ensure that all detainees, without exception, are promptly brought before a judge and have prompt access to a lawyer. The Committee also emphasizes that detainees should have prompt access to a lawyer, an independent doctor and family member are important means for the protection of suspects, offering added safeguards against torture and ill-treatment for detainees, and that these should be guaranteed to persons accused of security offenses.
16. While appreciating the adoption of the Criminal Procedure (Interrogating Suspects) Law of 2002, which requires that all stages of a suspect’s interrogation be recorded by video camera, the Committee notes with concern that the 2008 amendment to this law exempts interrogations of detainees accused of security offenses from this requirement. The State party has justified this on budgetary limitations and stated that the exemption of security-related suspects will only apply until December 2010.
Video recording of interrogations, too, is an important advance in protection of both the detainee and, for that matter, for law enforcement personnel. The Committee recommends that, as a matter of priority, the State party extend the legal requirement of video recording of interviews of detainees accused of security offenses as a further means to prevent torture and ill-treatment.

Administrative Detention and solitary confinement
17. The Committee has expressed concern that administrative detention does not conform to article 16 of the Convention because, among other reasons, it is used for “inordinately lengthy periods.” Administrative detention thus deprives detainees of basic safeguards including the right to challenge the evidence which is the basis for the detention, warrants are not required, and the detainee may be de facto in incommunicado detention for an extended period, subject to renewal. While the State party explains that this practice is used only exceptionally when confidentiality make it impossible to present evidence in ordinary criminal proceedings, the Committee regrets that the number of persons held in administrative detention has risen significantly since its last periodic report. According to the State party, 530 Palestinians are being held in administrative detention under Israeli security legislation and, according to non-governmental sources, as many as 700. The Committee further notes with concern that the Unlawful Combatants Law 5762-2002, as amended in August 2008, allows for the detention of non-Israeli citizens falling into the category of “unlawful combatants”, who are described as “combatants who are believed to have taken part in hostile activity against Israel, directly or indirectly” for a period of up to 14 days without any judicial review. Detention orders under this law can be renewed indefinitely; evidence is neither made available to the detainee nor to his lawyer and, although the detainees have the right to petition to the Supreme Court, the charges against them are also reportedly kept secret. According to the State party, twelve persons are detained under this law at present.
The State party should review as a matter of priority its legislation and policies to ensure that all detentions, and particularly administrative detentions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, are brought into conformity with article 16 of the Convention.
18. The Committee is concerned at reports received by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism of solitary confinement used by prison authorities as a means of encouraging confessions from minors or as a punishment for infractions of prison rules. It is alleged that security detainees are kept in interrogation facilities, ranging from three to six square meters, with no windows or access to daylight or fresh air.
The Committee once again calls upon Israel to examine its legislation and policies in order to ensure that all detainees, without exception, are promptly brought before a judge and have prompt access to a lawyer. The State party should amend current legislation in order to ensure that solitary confinement remains an exceptional measure of limited duration, in accordance with international minimum standards.

Allegations of torture and ill-treatment by Israeli interrogators
19. The Committee is concerned that there are numerous, ongoing and consistent allegations of the use of methods by Israeli security officials that were prohibited by the September 1999 ruling of the Israeli Supreme Court, and that are alleged to take place before, during and after interrogations. According to the State party, there were 67 investigations opened by the Inspector for Complaints against ISA interrogators in 2006, and 47 in 2007, but none resulted in criminal charges.
The State party should ensure that interrogation methods contrary to the Convention are not utilized under any circumstances. The State party should also ensure that all allegations of torture and ill-treatment are promptly and effectively investigated and perpetrators prosecuted and, if applicable, appropriate penalties are imposed. The Committee reiterates that, according to the Convention, “no exceptional circumstances” including security or a war or threat to security of the state justifies torture. The State party should intensify human rights education and training activities to security officials, including training on the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment.

Complaints and Need for Independent Investigations
20. The Committee notes that, out of 1,185 complaints investigated by the Israeli police for improper use of force during 2007, 82 criminal procedures have been initiated. The State party has noted the difficulty in investigating this type of complaints arguing that police officers are authorized to use reasonable force in the necessary cases.
The Committee requests information on the number of criminal procedures that have resulted in convictions of the accused and the penalties imposed.
21. While noting the State party’s clarification that “every claim regarding the use of allegedly impermissible means of interrogation is examined by the Inspector for Complaints,” the Committee is concerned that none of the over 600 complaints of ill-treatment by ISA interrogators received by the Inspector of Complaints between 2001 and 2008 has resulted in a criminal investigation. Although under supervision of the Attorney General, the Inspector of Complaints is an ISA employee. The Committee notes that, according to information received by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, out of 550 examinations of torture allegations initiated by the General Security Services (GSS) inspector between 2002 and 2007, only four resulted in disciplinary measures and none in prosecution. While the State party’s representatives explained that there is a lack of evidence for pursuing and substantiating these complaints, and that the persons submitting them are engaged in a “campaign” alleging false information, the Committee has been informed by NGOs that there is a decline in the number of complaints submitted, allegedly due to a sense of futility based on the absence of indictments and a sense of de facto impunity.
The State party should duly investigate all allegations of torture and ill-treatment by creating a fully independent and impartial mechanism outside the ISA.

Non-refoulement and risk of torture
22. While the Committee is aware of the fact that Israel hosts increasing numbers of asylum-seekers and refugees on its territory, and whereas the principle of non-refoulement under article 3 of the Convention has been recognised by the High Court as a binding principle, the Committee regrets that this principle has not been formally incorporated into domestic law, policy, practices or procedure. The responses submitted by the State party all refer only to the State Party’s obligations under the 1951 Convention Relating to Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, but do not even allude to the State party’s distinct obligations under the Convention Against Torture.
The principle of non-refoulement should be incorporated into the domestic legislation of the State party, so that the asylum procedure includes a thorough examination of the merits of each individual case under article 3 of the Convention. An adequate mechanism for the review of the decision to remove a person should also be in place.
23. The Committee notes with concern that, under article 1 of the draft amendment to the 1954 Infiltration to Israel Law (Jurisdiction and Felonies) Act, which was passed on 19 May 2008 in first reading by the Knesset, any person having entered Israel illegally is automatically presumed to constitute a risk to Israel’s security and falls within the category of “infiltrator” and can therefore be subjected to this law. The Committee is concerned that article 11 of this draft law allows Israeli Defence Forces officers to order the return of an “infiltrator” to the State or area of origin within 72 hours, without any exceptions, procedures or safeguards. The Committee considers that this procedure, void of any provision taking into account the principle of non-refoulement, is not in line with the State party’s obligations under article 3 of the Convention. The Israeli government reported 6,900 “infiltrators” during 2008.
The Committee notes that the draft amendment to the Infiltration to Israel Law, if adopted, would violate article 3 of the Convention. The Committee strongly recommends that this draft law be brought in line with the Convention and that, at a minimum, a provision be added to ensure an examination into the existence of substantive grounds for the existence of a risk of torture. Proper training of officials dealing with immigrants should be ensured, as well as monitoring and review of those official’s decisions to ensure against violations of article 3.
24. The Committee notes with concern that, on the basis of the “Coordinated Immediate Return Procedure", established by Israeli Defense Force order 1/3,000, IDF soldiers at the border - whom the State party has not asserted have been trained in legal obligations under the Convention Against Torture - are authorized to execute summary deportations without any procedural safeguards to prevent refoulement under article 3 of the Convention.
The Committee notes that such safeguards are necessary for each and every case whether or not there is a formal readmission agreement or diplomatic assurances between the State party and the receiving state.
Prohibition of unlawful or coerced evidence
25. While welcoming the Supreme Court decision Prv. Yisascharov v the Head Military Prosecutor et al, C.A. 5121/98, which laid down the doctrine of exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence, the Committee notes that the question of determining whether or not to admit such evidence is left to the discretion of the judge.
The State party should prohibit by law that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture cannot be invoked as evidence in any proceedings against the victim, in line with article 15 of the Convention.

Detention Facility 1391
26. Notwithstanding the information from the State party that ISA secret detention and interrogation facility known as “Facility 1391” has not been used since 2006 to detain or interrogate security suspects, the Committee notes with concern that several petitions filed to the Supreme Court to examine the facility were rejected and that the Supreme Court has found that Israeli authorities acted reasonably in not conducting investigations on allegations on torture and ill-treatment and poor detention conditions in the Facility.
The State party should ensure that no one is detained in any secret detention facility under its control in the future, as a secret detention center is per se a breach of the Convention. The State party should investigate and disclose the existence of any other such facility and the authority under which it has been established. It should ensure that all allegations of torture and ill-treatment by detainees in Facility 1391 be impartially investigated, the results made public, and any perpetrators responsible for breaches of the Convention be held accountable.

Juvenile Detainees
27. While noting the State party’s argument that several measures are being implemented to ensure children’s rights, including the preparation of a draft bill on the establishment of a new youth court, the Committee remains concerned at the differing definitions of a child in Israel –where legal age is attained at the age of 18- and in the occupied Palestinian territories –where legal age is attained at 16-. The Committee notes the State party’s explanation that Palestinian juveniles under age 18 are treated as minors when imprisoned within the state of Israel. Nonetheless, it expresses deep concern at reports from civil society groups that Palestinian minors are detained and interrogated in the absence of a lawyer or family member and allegedly subjected to acts in breach of the convention in order to obtain confessions. The Committee is further concerned by the allegations that approximately 700 Palestinian children annually were charged under military orders and prosecuted by Israeli military courts and that 95% of these cases have relied on confessions as evidence to obtain a conviction.
Military order 132 should be amended to ensure that the definition of minor is set at the age of 18, in line with international standards.
28. The Committee also notes with concern that all but one of the prisons where Palestinian juveniles are detained, are located in Israel, which hinders prisoners from receiving family visits, not only because of the distances, but also since some relatives have been denied necessary permits for security reasons, in 1,500 out of 80,000 cases, according to the State party and more often according to non-governmental sources.
The State party should ensure that juvenile detainees are afforded basic safeguards, before and during interrogations, including prompt access to an independent lawyer, and independent doctor and family member from the outset of their detention. Furthermore, the State party should ensure that cases against juveniles are not decided solely on the basis of confessions, and that the establishment of a youth court is completed as a matter of priority. In addition, every effort should be made to facilitate family visits to juvenile detainees, including by expanding the right to freedom of movement of relatives.

Hamoked for Secret prison facility 1391

HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual requests to submit the concluding observations of the UN Committee against Torture as an exhibit in its petition regarding secret prison facility 1391: In the concluding observations, the Committee demands operation of the facility cease and those responsible for the torture and ill-treatment of prisoners be brought to justice

On 25 May 2009, HaMoked filed a request to submit the concluding observations of the UN Committee against Torture to the Court as an exhibit in the petition filed in 2003 regarding secret prison facility 1391. The Committee, which monitors the implementation of the Convention against Torture by the States parties, convened during the month of May in Geneva and reviewed Israel’s fourth periodic report concerning its compliance with the Convention. In its concluding observations, the Committee issued demands to Israel as a State party to the Convention, including, inter alia, that it refrain from holding anyone in the secret prison facility known as 1391, or in any other secret facility, including in the future.

The information on which the Committee bases its concluding observations is obtained from periodic reports submitted by the States parties as well as other sources. The Committee received reports from HaMoked and other human rights organizations, which called attention to the matter of secret prison facility 1391, the existence of which was uncovered by HaMoked – Center for the Defence of the Individual in late 2002.

In 2003, immediately after uncovering the existence of the facility, HaMoked petitioned the High Court of Justice (HCJ) demanding it be shut down due to the strict prohibition on holding prisoners in an unknown location and without external supervision found in international humanitarian and human rights law. The HCJ has not yet delivered a decision on this matter and HaMoked’s legal battle continues; hence its request to submit the observations of the UN Committee in the framework of the ongoing proceedings before the Court.

In its defense, Israel has claimed before the Committee that no use has been made of Facility 1391 since 2006 and that no detainees were currently being held in it. Israel also claimed that all complaints of torture and ill-treatment of detainees in Facility 1391 had been investigated by the competent persons who had reached the conclusion that there was no cause to launch criminal proceedings against any of the persons involved. The Committee rejected Israel’s claims and, on termination of its session, published its demand that detainees no longer be held in the secret facility or any other secret facility, including in the future; that an impartial investigation be opened into allegations of torture and that persons responsible for torture of prisoners in the facility be held accountable. The Committee established that the existence of a secret prison facility within the territory of the State of Israel, which is a party to the Convention against Torture, is per se, a violation of the Convention, even if no detainees were held in it.

The demands set forth by the Committee in the matter of Facility 1391 and the human rights violations against those held in it, are yet another element serving to support HaMoked’s protracted battle to have the facility shut down and the persons responsible for running it along with anyone who participated in the torture and ill-treatment of prisoners brought to justice.

The Background for the Petition

The existence of Facility 1391 was uncovered by HaMoked in the course of its endeavors to locate detainees. During the Israeli invasion of West Bank cities in 2002 (Operation Defensive Shield), the military detained thousands of Palestinians and HaMoked received countless appeals from families asking to find where they were being held. Where tracing efforts failed to yield information, HaMoked was forced to submit petitions for writs of habeas corpus in order to reveal the whereabouts of the detainees. In the framework of two such petitions, a police officer at the Kishon detention facility told HaMoked that the detainees were being held in a secret facility which was part of the Kishon facility administratively, but that its geographic location was unknown. HaMoked insisted, and the State was forced to admit that a secret detention facility, 1391, existed and that detainees were being held there for extended periods of time. At the same time, HaMoked began collecting detailed testimonies from detainees regarding the illegal interrogation methods used at Facility 1391, which included torture, ill-treatment and inhuman holding conditions.

In 2003, HaMoked filed a petition regarding the illegality of the prison facility and demanded it be shut down. In a hearing held in the petition on 15 December 2004, the Court criticized the position of the State which found no fault in holding detainees in an unknown location. In its response, the State informed the Court that at that given moment no detainees were being held in the facility. The State subsequently notified of restrictions placed on the use of Facility 1391, including that only an officer holding the rank of Major General would have the power to authorize holding of detainees in the facility and that no Israeli citizens or Palestinian residents of the Territories would be held there. The remaining details of the arrangement formulated by the State were kept confidential.

The Court ordered the State to submit a notice, ex parte, each time a detainee was held in the secret facility in order to enable the Court to deliver the appropriate decision in each and every case.

During the second Lebanon war, in the summer of 2006, the State notified, in response to HaMoked’s query, that Lebanese citizens were indeed being held in Facility 1391. HaMoked represented some of them before the courts. In January 2009, HaMoked demanded to know whether Israel was holding detainees from the Gaza Strip in Facility 1391 and was given a negative answer.

To view the request dated 25 May 2009

UN torture watchdog demands access to secret jail

Jonathan Cook, Foreign Correspondent

• The National Last Updated: May 16. 2009 10:53PM UAE / May 16. 2009 6:53PM GMT

The UN is demanding that Facility 1391, a secret prison camp in northern Israel where it is believed prisoners are routinely tortured, be opened to inspectors.

Nazareth, Israel // The United Nation’s watchdog on torture has criticised Israel for refusing to allow inspections at a secret prison, dubbed by critics as “Israel’s Guantanamo Bay”, and demanded to know if more such clandestine detention camps are operating.

In a report published on Friday, the Committee Against Torture requested that Israel identify the location of the camp, officially referred to as “Facility 1391”, and allow access to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Findings from Israeli human rights groups show that the prison has in the past been used to hold Arab and Muslim prisoners, including Palestinians, and that routine torture and physical abuse were carried out by interrogators.

The UN committee’s panel of 10 independent experts also found credible the submissions from Israeli groups that Palestinian detainees were systematically tortured despite the banning of such practices by the Israeli Supreme Court in 1999.

The existence of Facility 1391 came to light in 2002, when Palestinians were detained there for the first time during Israel’s reinvasion of the West Bank.

In a submission to human rights groups last week, Israel denied that any prisoners are currently being held at the site, although it admits that several Lebanese were detained there during the attack on Lebanon in 2006. The committee expressed concern about an Israeli Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that found it “reasonable” for the state not to investigate suspicions of torture at the prison. The panel is believed to be concerned that without inspections the prison might still be in use or could be revived at short notice.The Israeli court, the committee wrote, “should ensure that all allegations of torture and ill-treatment by detainees in Facility 1391 be impartially investigated [and] the results made public”.

Hamoked, an Israeli human rights organisation, first identified the prison after two Palestinian cousins seized in Nablus in 2002 could not be traced by their families. Israeli officials eventually admitted that the pair were being held at a secret site.

Israel still refuses to identify the precise location of the prison, which is inside Israel and about 100km north of Jerusalem. A few buildings are visible, but most of the prison is built underground.

“We only learnt about the prison because the army made the mistake of putting Palestinians there when they ran out of room in Israel’s main prisons,” said Dalia Kerstein, the director of Hamoked.

“The real purpose of the camp is to interrogate prisoners from the Arab and Muslim world, who would be difficult to trace because their families are unlikely to contact Israeli organisations for help.”

Ms Kerstein said the prison site was an even grosser violation of international law than Guantanamo Bay because it had never been inspected and no one knew what took place there.

According to the testimonies of the Palestinian cousins, Mohammed and Bashar Jadallah, they were held in isolation cells measuring two metres square, with black walls, no windows and a light bulb on 24 hours a day. On the rare occasions they were escorted outside, they had to wear blacked-out goggles.

When Bashar Jadallah, 50, asked where he was, he was told he was “on the moon”.

According to the testimony of Mohammed Jadallah, 23, he was repeatedly beaten, his shackles tightened, he was tied in painful positions to a chair, he was not allowed to go to the toilet and he was prevented from sleeping, with water thrown on him if he nodded off. Interrogators are also reported to have shown him pictures of family members and threatened to harm them.

Although Palestinians passing through the prison were interrogated by the domestic secret police, the Shin Bet, foreign nationals at the prison fall under the responsibility of a special wing of military intelligence known as Unit 504, whose interrogation methods are believed to be much harsher.

Shortly after the prison came to light, a former inmate – Mustafa Dirani, a leader of the Lebanese Shia group Amal – launched a court case in Israel claiming he had been raped by a guard.

Mr Dirani, seized from Lebanon in 1994, was held in Facility 1391 for eight years along with a Hizbollah leader, Sheikh Abdel Karim Obeid. Israel hoped to extract information from the pair in its search for a missing airman, Ron Arad, downed over Lebanon in 1986.

Mr Dirani alleged in court that he had been physically abused by a senior army interrogator known as “Major George”, including an incident when he was sodomised with a baton.

The case was dropped in early 2004 when Mr Dirani was released in a prisoner exchange.

Ms Kerstein said there was no proof that more prisons existed in Israel like Facility 1391, but some of the testimonies collected from former inmates suggested that they had been held at different secret locations.

She said the concern was that Israel might have been one of the countries that received “extraordinary rendition” flights, in which prisoners captured by the United States were smuggled to other countries for torture.

“If a democracy allows one of these prisons, who is to say that there are not more?” she said.

The committee examined other suspicions of torture involving Israel. It expressed particular concern about Israel’s failure to investigate more than 600 complaints made by detainees against the Shin Bet since the panel’s last hearings, in 2001.

It also highlighted the pressure put on Gazans who needed to enter Israel for medical treatment to turn informer.

Ishai Menuchin, executive director of Israel’s Public Committee against Torture, said his group had sent several submissions to the committee showing that torture was systematically used against detainees.

“After the court decision in 1999, interrogators simply learnt to be more creative in their techniques,” he said.

He added that, since Israel’s redefinition of Gaza as an “enemy state”, some Palestinians seized there were being held as “illegal combatants” rather than “security detainees”.

“In those circumstances, they might qualify for incarceration in secret prisons like Facility 1391.”

jcook@thenational.ae

Wa’ed: Israel practices the ugliest torture methods in secret prisons

[ 16/05/2009 - 04:42 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- The Wa’ed society for detainees and ex-detainees reported Saturday that all information available indicates that Israel practices the most heinous methods of torture against Palestinian prisoners in its secret jails, expressing disappointment at the Red Cross’s failure to visit these prisons where hundreds of Palestinians are locked up. In a statement received by the PIC, the Wa’ed society added that the Israeli intelligence imposes a news blackout on the incarceration conditions of Palestinian prisoners imprisoned in secret jails, noting that some prisoners no one knows their whereabouts such as prisoners Hasan Salama and Abdullah Al-Barghouthi. The society also said that the families of Gaza prisoners are prohibited from visiting their sons and daughters in Israeli jails for nearly two years in addition to a large number of West Bank prisoners who are deprived from their families’ visits. The society appealed to all international organizations concerned with human and prisoners’ rights to urgently intervene to stop the Israeli violations against the Palestinian prisoners and their families, pointing out that it had already met with the Red Cross but did not sense any serious move towards ending the restrictions imposed on prisoners' visits.

UN committee charges Israel with maintaining secret jail

[ 06/05/2009 - 10:48 AM ]

GENEVA, (PIC)-- The UN committee against torture has denounced the Israeli general security apparatus for using a secret detention center for interrogation that could not be visited by the Red Cross, lawyers or relatives of those detainees. The ten independent experts, members of the committee, said that the installation "1391" was located in an unspecified area in Israel. They added that the committee received complaints on torture, maltreatment and inappropriate detention conditions in this installation. The committee said that some of the Israeli security officers were exercising practices against Palestinian detainees that violate the convention against torture whether during the interrogation or after it. Such practices include severe beating, forcing detainees to sit in awkward positions for long period, tightening the handcuffs, violently shaking the detainee and turning his head suddenly and violently, the committee elaborated. It criticized Israel for issuing military detention orders against 12-year-old children for eight days whether they were indicted or not and without appearing before a military judge. The committee noted that the military memo allows retaining those detainees for 90 days without seeing a lawyer and for 188 days without charge. It asked Israel on the measures taken in response to the UNHCR call for an immediate end to the siege on Gaza Strip, which deprives one and a half million Palestinians from the simplest human rights. The committee is expected to hear answers from Israel before issuing its report at the end of its current session on 15th May.