The Court rejected HaMoked's appeal against the Beer-Sheva District Court's decision to uphold an imprisonment order under the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law issued against a Palestinian during the war in Gaza: The Court ruled that despite the fact that the incarceration procedure was faulty, the confidential material presented by the State justified the order המוקד להגנת הפרט عر HE wheel chair icon
כפתור חיפוש
תמונה ללא תיאור
08.04.2009
The Court rejected HaMoked's appeal against the Beer-Sheva District Court's decision to uphold an imprisonment order under the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law issued against a Palestinian during the war in Gaza: The Court ruled that despite the fact that the incarceration procedure was faulty, the confidential material presented by the State justified the order
The Court rejected HaMoked's appeal against the Beer-Sheva District Court's decision to uphold an imprisonment order under the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law issued against a Palestinian during the war in Gaza: The Court ruled that despite the fact that the incarceration procedure was faulty, the confidential material presented by the State justified the order

On 5 January 2009, during the war in Gaza, the military arrested a resident of Beit Hanun, a married father of six, and issued an imprisonment order against him, under the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law. The detainee's attempts to explain to the soldiers who arrested him that he belonged to the Fatah movement and not to Hamas fell on deaf ears. The soldiers took a document  which indicates he is an employee of the Palestinian intelligence service, and proves he is employed by the Palestinian Authority – and ignored further proof he submitted which attested to the veracity of his claims. Furthermore, the incarceration order issued later indicated that the officer who signed it relied on intelligence linking the detainee to the Democratic Front. Despite the fact that the detainee's affiliation was switched from Hamas to the Democratic Front, he was denied the opportunity to defend himself against the new allegations in a hearing.

On 15 January, the Beer-Sheva District Court held a judicial review in the matter of the detainee. The Court decided to authorize the detention order, despite the absence of a proper hearing and other faults in the issuance of the order and despite the contradicting versions regarding the prisoner’s organizational affiliation, which casts doubt on the question of individual danger emanating from him. On 17 February 2009, HaMoked appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.

On 2 April 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that despite the absence of a proper hearing during the incarceration procedure, in the judicial review proceedings the detainee was given an opportunity to argue against the new claims raised against him concerning membership in the Democratic Front. After reviewing the confidential material concerning the detainee ex parte, the Court ruled that the detainee's Fatah membership does not exclude his simultaneously being a high ranking member of the Democratic Front, and that his release would pose a danger to the State. Therefore, the Court rejected the petition to void the order.

To view the decision in the appeal dated 2 April 2009 (Hebrew)

To view the notice of appeal dated 17 February 2009 (Hebrew)

To view the District Court's decision dated 19 January 2009 (Hebrew)

Print Print
Share

On 5 January 2009, during the war in Gaza, the military arrested a resident of Beit Hanun, a married father of six, and issued an imprisonment order against him, under the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law. The detainee's attempts to explain to the soldiers who arrested him that he belonged to the Fatah movement and not to Hamas fell on deaf ears. The soldiers took a document  which indicates he is an employee of the Palestinian intelligence service, and proves he is employed by the Palestinian Authority – and ignored further proof he submitted which attested to the veracity of his claims. Furthermore, the incarceration order issued later indicated that the officer who signed it relied on intelligence linking the detainee to the Democratic Front. Despite the fact that the detainee's affiliation was switched from Hamas to the Democratic Front, he was denied the opportunity to defend himself against the new allegations in a hearing.

On 15 January, the Beer-Sheva District Court held a judicial review in the matter of the detainee. The Court decided to authorize the detention order, despite the absence of a proper hearing and other faults in the issuance of the order and despite the contradicting versions regarding the prisoner’s organizational affiliation, which casts doubt on the question of individual danger emanating from him. On 17 February 2009, HaMoked appealed the decision to the Supreme Court.

On 2 April 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that despite the absence of a proper hearing during the incarceration procedure, in the judicial review proceedings the detainee was given an opportunity to argue against the new claims raised against him concerning membership in the Democratic Front. After reviewing the confidential material concerning the detainee ex parte, the Court ruled that the detainee's Fatah membership does not exclude his simultaneously being a high ranking member of the Democratic Front, and that his release would pose a danger to the State. Therefore, the Court rejected the petition to void the order.

To view the decision in the appeal dated 2 April 2009 (Hebrew)

To view the notice of appeal dated 17 February 2009 (Hebrew)

To view the District Court's decision dated 19 January 2009 (Hebrew)

משפט ישראלי - מסמכים אחרים


משפט ישראלי - כתבי בי דין


משפט ישראלי - חקיקה


משפט ישראלי - פסיקה


משפט בינלאומי וזר - מסמכים אחרים


משפט בינלאומי וזר - אמנות וחקיקה


משפט בינלאומי וזר - פסיקה


ספרות - עדכונים


ספרות - פסיקה במבחן


ספרות - ספרים


ספרות - מאמרים


ספרות - שונות


ספרות - דוחות