State attorney’s office in response to HaMoked's protest against severe harassment of a Palestinian who wishes to study abroad: We will direct the security agencies to abstain from directly approaching Palestinians whose case is pending before the courts without coordination between the state attorney's office and petitioners’ counsel המוקד להגנת הפרט
عر HE wheel chair icon
כפתור חיפוש
תמונה ללא תיאור
25.04.2010
State attorney’s office in response to HaMoked's protest against severe harassment of a Palestinian who wishes to study abroad: We will direct the security agencies to abstain from directly approaching Palestinians whose case is pending before the courts without coordination between the state attorney's office and petitioners’ counsel
State attorney’s office in response to HaMoked's protest against severe harassment of a Palestinian who wishes to study abroad: We will direct the security agencies to abstain from directly approaching Palestinians whose case is pending before the courts without coordination between the state attorney's office and petitioners’ counsel
On December 12, 2009, HaMoked sent a letter of complaint to the state attorney’s office regarding unacceptable conduct by the security agencies in the case of a Palestinian resident of the West Bank, on whose behalf HaMoked petitioned to allow his departure to Malaysia, for his doctoral studies.
 
During the proceedings, the state decided to lift the security preclusion and allow him to travel abroad. A few days later – with the petition still pending – a person who introduced himself as “captain Ayman” called the petitioner and summoned him to a “conversation", to be held in an hour. Neither the student, nor HaMoked, could comprehend the nature of this communication, since, as said, the ban had already been lifted. The student decided to attend the "conversation", fearing otherwise, the security forces will continue badgering him and him from leaving abroad. During the "conversation", the representative of the Israel Security Agency (ISA) presented the lifting of the preclusion as a gesture on his part, and made it clear that the student is under the ISA's watchful eye, and he should, therefore, act accordingly.

HaMoked strongly opposed the fact that security officials make direct contact with individuals who are involved in pending petitions against the security forces. Graver still, as HaMoked stated in its appeal, this is an attempt to intimidate a student on the eve of his departure abroad – on approval of the security forces. HaMoked demanded that the state attorney’s office clarify to the relevant officials the extreme severity of such unacceptable conduct.
 
The state attorney’s office stated there was no intention to intimidate the petitioner, but rather to "minimize potential risks arising from his departure abroad"; further stating that the professional agents were instructed to abstain from directly contacting anyone whose case is pending before the court, prior to a mutual arrangement by the legal representatives of both parties.
Print Print
Share
On December 12, 2009, HaMoked sent a letter of complaint to the state attorney’s office regarding unacceptable conduct by the security agencies in the case of a Palestinian resident of the West Bank, on whose behalf HaMoked petitioned to allow his departure to Malaysia, for his doctoral studies.
 
During the proceedings, the state decided to lift the security preclusion and allow him to travel abroad. A few days later – with the petition still pending – a person who introduced himself as “captain Ayman” called the petitioner and summoned him to a “conversation", to be held in an hour. Neither the student, nor HaMoked, could comprehend the nature of this communication, since, as said, the ban had already been lifted. The student decided to attend the "conversation", fearing otherwise, the security forces will continue badgering him and him from leaving abroad. During the "conversation", the representative of the Israel Security Agency (ISA) presented the lifting of the preclusion as a gesture on his part, and made it clear that the student is under the ISA's watchful eye, and he should, therefore, act accordingly.

HaMoked strongly opposed the fact that security officials make direct contact with individuals who are involved in pending petitions against the security forces. Graver still, as HaMoked stated in its appeal, this is an attempt to intimidate a student on the eve of his departure abroad – on approval of the security forces. HaMoked demanded that the state attorney’s office clarify to the relevant officials the extreme severity of such unacceptable conduct.
 
The state attorney’s office stated there was no intention to intimidate the petitioner, but rather to "minimize potential risks arising from his departure abroad"; further stating that the professional agents were instructed to abstain from directly contacting anyone whose case is pending before the court, prior to a mutual arrangement by the legal representatives of both parties.
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