FREE MANAL AND NOUR

Manal's Sentence

Manal is serving a 50 month sentence. Officially, she was accused of conspiracy in an attempted planning to kill. The details of her case show that she had attempted to carry weapons from one site to another. The attempt failed and she did not try to do it again and has never been part of any planning to any action. The Israeli Military Judge, who ruled in her case, said in the ruling remarks:

“Her role was very minor and insignificant in the planning and she did not know any pervious information about the attempt… she joined at a very late stage of planning… we have to mercy her son who was born in a very tough situation and who will spend his first years at prison… Manal did not participate in planning… she is not a member of or a supporter of any organization… she is not affiliated to any political faction, she had never been part of or accused of any violation in the past”

Despite these comments and despite the facts of her case, the Military Tribunal of Shemron decided to sentence her to maximum possible imprisonment term relative to such an accusation. The prison administration at Telmond Prison does not provide Manal and Nour with the special medical care they require, nor does it provide Nour with the milk he needs as his mother is unable to breast feed him.

Judicial Structures

Israeli military orders govern the implemented procedures and the treatment of Palestinian detainees and prisoners from the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The military commander of each region of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, issues these military orders. Despite the nominal increase in legal powers of the Palestinian Authority, and the establishment of Palestinian civil courts, military orders still remain in force within the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Within the courts, military orders always take precedence over Israeli and international law. Israeli military courts refuse to apply international laws and conventions, and it is impossible to make any legal claims to protect individuals under military occupation. When international law is used, it is used only in situations that favor the occupying power.

The norm is that Palestinians from the Occupied Palestinian Territories are submitted to Israeli military courts, even in some cases of civil incidents, such as a car accident involving an Israeli. Military courts of appeal are the last instance. The case of Marwan Barghouti, for example, is unique in that it is taking place within a civil court.

Military courts apply legislation on the use of force in an arbitrary manner,. The military legislation in itself is discriminatory. Confessions made under torture, for example, are enough to sentence a child to several years of imprisonment. Charges and sentences are based on wide-ranging interpretations of military regulations. For example, an individual may be arrested for pouring coffee at a funeral of a member of an illegal organisation, under the charge of “support for an illegal organisation”. All political organisations remain illegal in the Occupied Palestinian Territories under military regulations, including political parties currently involved in peace negotiations with Israel.

Discriminatory Laws

There are several stark discrepancies between Israeli law pertaining to Palestinian and Israeli detention respectively. For example, a Palestinian can, as of August 2003, be held in custody for 8 days before being brought before a judge. An Israeli citizen, however, can be held in custody for only a maximum of 24 hours before being brought before a judge. A Palestinian can be held without charge, by order of a military judge, for an initial period of up to 90, not necessarily continuously, days. This period can be extended for another period of up to 90 days by the legal advisor for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, via a military court of appeals (this form of detention differs from administrative detention, in which case no charges are brought against the detainee). An Israeli citizen can be held without indictment for an initial period of 15 days, which can be extended for only another 15 days.

In another example of discriminatory laws, whereas lawyer visits can be prohibited for up to 60 days after the day of arrest for a Palestinian detainee, the meeting between an Israeli detainee and his attorney can only be delayed for a total of 15 days.

This trend can also be witnessed in sentencing. As the maximum allowable sentences in civilian courts are considerably less severe than those permitted in the military tribunals, there are often significant differences in sentences passed for identical crimes committed by Israelis and Palestinians. For example, a Palestinian convicted of manslaughter by a military tribunal is subject to a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, while an Israeli convicted of manslaughter in a civilian court and sentenced to life imprisonment is imprisoned for a maximum of 20 years in most cases and, occasionally, at the most, 25 years. Capital punishment under military orders does exist in theory but rarely practiced. The last time a Capital Punishment was ruled against a Palestinian was in 1988 though it was not executed.

The difference in sentencing structures is reinforced by regulations in the two penal systems regarding the early release of prisoners. Under the Israeli penal code, criminal prisoners may be released after serving one-half of their sentences, whereas Palestinians judged under military rule are only allowed to appeal for probation after two-thirds of
the sentence has been served. It should be noted that Palestinian detainees are rarely released early. Palestinians are separate and unequal before the law; they are governed under different penal codes and in different courts than Israelis, and application of the law is systematically discriminatory.

Description of offences

In addition to administrative detention allowing in practice for the detention of every Palestinian, to the extremely loose interpretations of " security reasons " and the arbitrary application of the law, the defintions of crimes in Israeli legislation are additional sites where ambiguity can be manipulated, often resulting in increased sentences and imprisonment for Palestinians. For example, participating in an exhibition to benefit a charity organization linked to Hamas is a crime of "terrorist association ". Carrying or placing a Palestinian flag is a crime in itself under Israeli military regulations. Removing the rubbish put in the middle of a road by Israeli soldiers after they have left is another crime. Firing in the air during a wedding, as a form of celebration, constitutes a danger to Israel's national security,despite the fact that it occurs in Palestinian Authority areas (area A). A student of a Hamas Koranic school can be sentenced to 14 months imprisonment for his participation in class. Participation in a demonstration is deemed a disruption of public order. Pouring coffee for a member of a declared illegal association can be seen as support for a terrorist organization. Palestinian national security forces are an illegal association

Comparative Case Studies

Sana’a, 14 years old, from Hebron was arrested after her older sister had attempted to stab an Israeli settler. She was found guilty of planning to stab a settler, however the court agreed that Sana’a did not carry out her plan and, in fact, at the time of her arrest was standing alone and unaware of what was happening around her. Five months after her arrest, a three-judge court, after 3 hours of deliberation, sentenced her to 1 year in prison with an additional 4 years suspended sentence if she should commit any offence during the next 5 years. The court did not take into account her age or the fact that she did not carry out any violent act. During the whole day at the courtroom, she was not given food and her legs remained shackled. Her hands were handcuffed whenever the judges left the room. Her father was not allowed to speak to his daughter.

Nahum, 37 years old, from the illegal settlement of Betar Ilit, was sentenced to 6 months of community service for the brutal slaying of an 11-year-old Palestinian boy. According to eyewitnesses, Nahum brutally killed the boy by kicking him in the head and beating him with the butt of his rifle. Originally acquitted by the District Court of Jerusalem, the Israeli Supreme Court found him responsible for the murder after an appeal by the prosecutors. However, Nahum received a sentence of only community service and a fine of $17,000 US.

Between December 1987 (the beginning of the first Intifada) and March 2001, Israeli settlers killed 119 Palestinians, including 23 children under the age of 17, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. From the serious deficiencies evidenced in investigations, or merely the lack of investigation itself, to the low sentences passed by courts, the complicity of the Israeli legal system in the cases of murder of Palestinians is evident. Of 89 cases monitored by the Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem over this period, only 22 were convicted: 6 of murder, 7 of manslaughter, 7 of negligent homicide, and 2 charged with firing in a residential area and possession of a weapon without a permit. Only 3 convictions resulted in life sentences, from which 2 were reduced to 13 and 11 years respectively. Although the expected sentence for manslaughter is 20 years, the 7 settlers convicted of this crime received sentences ranging from 6 months to 7 and half years of imprisonment. While the normal sentence for negligent homicide is 3 years, of the 7 cases mentioned above, 5 received community service sentences and 2 received 5 and 18 months prison sentences. 39 files were closed without legal actions.

Between December 1987 and March 2001, 115 Israelis were killed by Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In each case, an investigation has been opened. Only 10 cases have been closed. 33 Palestinians were convicted of murder and all received life sentences, without the possibility of clemency or reduction of their sentence. One Palestinian was convicted for complicity of murder. No Palestinian was convicted for manslaughter or negligent homicide, rather than murder. No Palestinian was acquitted because he had acted in self-defence. Israeli security forces killed 15 suspects before they were brought to trial. In 22 cases, in addition to the prison sentence, the house of a suspect's family has been demolished or sealed.