12 January 2011 | International Solidarity Movement
Dkaika children outside their destroyed classroom
More than 13 homes and three school buildings were bulldozed this morning by occupation forces in the small Bedouin village of Dkaika near Yatta south of Hebron. One eye witness – an English teacher at the school – said “the Israeli army arrived at the village at around 7:30am with over fifty military vehicles and at least six bulldozers before forcibly removing the children from the school and destroying three classrooms.” He went on, “the children, some of whom are as young as seven years old, were crying and shouting at the soldiers to stop.”
In addition to the destruction wrought upon the school, ISM representatives were led by the crushed earthen tracks and violent gouge marks left by bulldozers to the tell tale piles of rubble and twisted steel which littered the surrounding area. If there had been any doubt that each had once been a home, then the hurriedly assembled mounds of personal possessions, furniture, and children’s toys which accompanied each pile of rubble surely testified to the fact that these were dwellings.
As it was, there were plenty of family members eager to testify themselves, and in the moments following the re-opening of the village’s only road, EAPPI and ISM members– who had been prevented by road blocks from accessing the scene – moved in to speak to those left homeless by the action.
When asked what reason was given for the demolition, the above witness, visibly upset, replied “they do not want us to live here, that is the reason. I would like to tell you that this community has been here since before the establishment of the Israeli [state]. They took most of our land during the Nakba and they would like to dismiss us from here completely”.
The court has accepted the military prosecution’s appeal to harshen Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s sentence to a total of 16 months. Abu Rahmah was supposed to be released on November 18th 2010, but was kept in detention by the military prosecution’s request, despite having finished serving his term. He will now serve an additional 3 months in prison.
After ordering to keep Abdallah Abu Rahmah in detention past his release date on the 18th of November 2010, the Military Court of Appeals sided with the prosecution’s appeal demanding to aggravate the one-year sentence imposed on Abu Rahmah. The prosecution asked the court to harshen the sentence so that it exceeds two years imprisonment. However, the judge gave a sentence of a total of sixteen months. He has been in jail for exactly thirteen months and one day. He will now serve three more months to complete the sixteen month sentence.
The judge sided with the military prosecution in front of a packed courtroom, which included the German and Spanish heads of consul in East Jerusalem, as well as diplomatic representatives from France, Malta, Sweden, Austria, United Kingdom, and the European Commission. Despite international outrage, the prosecution openly argued that the sentence should be extended for political reasons, namely “to serve as a deterrence not only to [Abu Rahmah] himself, but also to others who may follow in his footsteps.” Abdallah Abu Rahmah served as the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements until his arrest last year. Such arguments by the prosecution expose the real motivation behind the countless recent arrests of anti-Wall organizers and activists, which is to squash the popular struggle movement in the West Bank.
Adv. Gabi Lasky, Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s lawyer: “Israel has tried violent means to hinder and stop the popular unarmed demonstrations in the West Bank. Military courts are an instrument of the occupation and their verdicts are devised to help the occupation continue. This decision makes a mockery of the law and justice itself.”
On October 11th 2010, Abu Rahmah was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment for his prominent role in his village’s successful campaign against the construction of Israel’s Separation Barrier on its lands. Abu Rahmah was convicted of two Freedom of Expression charges – incitement and organizing illegal demonstrations, but was cleared of all charges connecting him with direct violence.
Abu Rahmah was to be released from prison on November 18th, when the prison term he was sentenced to ended, but was kept in jail on the order of the Military Court of Appeals. The controversial decision directly conflicts with the jurisprudence of the Israeli Hight Court on the issue, instructing that a prisoner should only be kept under arrest after his term was over in the most extenuating of circumstances.
Abu Rahmah was declared a human rights defender by the European Union, and his conviction and sentence generated international outrage, and was denounced by human rights organizations and the international community alike, including EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton.
Background
Abu Rahmah, the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, was arrested last year by soldiers who raided his home at the middle of the night and was subsequently indicted before an Israeli military court on unsubstantiated charges that included stone-throwing and arms possession. Abu Rahmah was cleared of both the stone-throwing and arms possession charges, but convicted of organizing illegal demonstrations and incitement.
An exemplary case of mal-use of the Israeli military legal system in the West Bank for the purpose of silencing legitimate political dissent, Abu Rahmah’s conviction was subject to harsh international criticism. The EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, expressed her deep concern “that the possible imprisonment of Mr Abu Rahma is intended to prevent him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest[…]”, after EU diplomats attended all hearings in Abu Rahmah’s case. Ashton’s statement was followed by one from the Spanish Parliament.
Renowned South African human right activist, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, called on Israel to overturn Abu Rahmah’s conviction on behalf of the Elders, a group of international public figures noted as elder statesmen, peace activists, and human rights advocates, brought together by Nelson Mandela. Members of the Elders, including Tutu, have met with Abu Rahmah on their visit to Bil’in prior to his arrest.
International human rights organization Amnesty International condemned Abu Rahmah’s conviction as an assault on the right to freedom of expression. Human Rights Watch denounced the conviction, pronouncing the whole process “an unfair trial”.
Israeli organizations also distributed statements against the conviction – including a statement by B’Tselem which raises the issue of questionable testimonies by minors used to convict Abu Rahme, and The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) which highlights the impossibility of organizing legal demonstrations for Palestinians in the West Bank.
Legal Background
Abu Rahmah, the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, was acquitted of two out of the four charges brought against him in the indictment – stone-throwing and a ridiculous and vindictive arms possession charge. According to the indictment, Abu Rahmah collected used tear-gas projectiles and bullet casings shot at demonstrators, with the intention of exhibiting them to show the violence used against demonstrators. This absurd charge is a clear example of how eager the military prosecution is to use legal procedures as a tool to silence and smear unarmed dissent.
The court did, however, find Abu Rahmah guilty of two of the most draconian anti-free speech articles in military legislation: incitement, and organizing and participating in illegal demonstrations. It did so based only on testimonies of minors who were arrested in the middle of the night and denied their right to legal counsel, and despite acknowledging significant ills in their questioning.
The court was also undeterred by the fact that the prosecution failed to provide any concrete evidence implicating Abu Rahmah in any way, despite the fact that all demonstrations in Bil’in are systematically filmed by the army.
Under military law, incitement is defined as “The attempt, verbally or otherwise, to influence public opinion in the Area in a way that may disturb the public peace or public order” (section 7(a) of the Order Concerning Prohibition of Activities of Incitement and Hostile Propaganda (no.101), 1967), and carries a 10 years maximal sentence.
The court will deliver a decision on the military prosecution’s appeal to harshen Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s sentence. Abu Rahmah was supposed to be released on November 18th 2010, but has been kept in detention on the military prosecution’s request.
What: Appeal Verdict in Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s case.
Where: Military Court of Appeals, Ofer compound.
When: 10:00 AM, Tuesday, January 11.
After ordering to keep Abdallah Abu Rahmah in detention past his release date on the 18th of November, the Military Court of appeals will deliver its verdict on the prosecution’s appeal demanding to aggravate the one-year sentence imposed on Abu Rahmah. The prosecution is asking the court to harshen the sentence so that it exceeds two years imprisonment.
Despite international outrage over the mishandling of Abu Rahmah, the prosecution openly argues that the sentence should be extended for political reasons, namely “to serve as a deterrence not only to [Abu Rahmah] himself, but also to others who may follow in his footsteps.” Abdallah Abu Rahmah served as the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, until his arrest last year. Such arguments by the prosecution expose the real motivation behind the countless arrests of anti-Wall organizers and activists recently which is to squash the popular struggle movement in the West Bank.
On October 11th, Abu Rahmah was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment for his prominent role in his village’s successful campaign against the construction of Israel’s Separation Barrier on its lands. Abu Rahmah was convicted of two Freedom of Expression charges – incitement and organizing illegal demonstrations, but was cleared of all charges connecting him with direct violence.
Abu Rahmah was to be released from prison on November 18th, when the prison term he was sentenced to ended, but was kept in jail on the order of the Military Court of Appeals. The controversial decision directly conflicts with the jurisprudence of the Israeli Hight Court on the issue, instructing that a prisoner should only be kept under arrest after his term was over in the most extenuating of circumstances.
Abu Rahmah was declared a human rights defender by the European Union, and his conviction and sentence generated international outrage, and was denounced by human rights organizations and the international community alike, including EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton.
Background
Abu Rahmah, the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, was arrested last year by soldiers who raided his home at the middle of the night and was subsequently indicted before an Israeli military court on unsubstantiated charges that included stone-throwing and arms possession. Abu Rahmah was cleared of both the stone-throwing and arms possession charges, but convicted of organizing illegal demonstrations and incitement.
An exemplary case of mal-use of the Israeli military legal system in the West Bank for the purpose of silencing legitimate political dissent, Abu Rahmah’s conviction was subject to harsh international criticism. The EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, expressed her deep concern “that the possible imprisonment of Mr Abu Rahma is intended to prevent him and other Palestinians from exercising their legitimate right to protest[…]”, after EU diplomats attended all hearings in Abu Rahmah’s case. Ashton’s statement was followed by one from the Spanish Parliament.
Renowned South African human right activist, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, called on Israel to overturn Abu Rahmah’s conviction on behalf of the Elders, a group of international public figures noted as elder statesmen, peace activists, and human rights advocates, brought together by Nelson Mandela. Members of the Elders, including Tutu, have met with Abu Rahmah on their visit to Bil’in prior to his arrest.
International human rights organization Amnesty International condemned Abu Rahmah’s conviction as an assault on the right to freedom of expression. Human Rights Watch denounced the conviction, pronouncing the whole process “an unfair trial”.
Israeli organizations also distributed statements against the conviction – including a statement by B’Tselem which raises the issue of questionable testimonies by minors used to convict Abu Rahme, and The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) which highlights the impossibility of organizing legal demonstrations for Palestinians in the West Bank.
Legal Background
Abu Rahmah, the coordinator of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, was acquitted of two out of the four charges brought against him in the indictment – stone-throwing and a ridiculous and vindictive arms possession charge. According to the indictment, Abu Rahmah collected used tear-gas projectiles and bullet casings shot at demonstrators, with the intention of exhibiting them to show the violence used against demonstrators. This absurd charge is a clear example of how eager the military prosecution is to use legal procedures as a tool to silence and smear unarmed dissent.
The court did, however, find Abu Rahmah guilty of two of the most draconian anti-free speech articles in military legislation: incitement, and organizing and participating in illegal demonstrations. It did so based only on testimonies of minors who were arrested in the middle of the night and denied their right to legal counsel, and despite acknowledging significant ills in their questioning.
The court was also undeterred by the fact that the prosecution failed to provide any concrete evidence implicating Abu Rahmah in any way, despite the fact that all demonstrations in Bil’in are systematically filmed by the army.
Under military law, incitement is defined as “The attempt, verbally or otherwise, to influence public opinion in the Area in a way that may disturb the public peace or public order” (section 7(a) of the Order Concerning Prohibition of Activities of Incitement and Hostile Propaganda (no.101), 1967), and carries a 10 years maximal sentence.
One West Bank family has paid the highest price for their village’s peaceful pursuit of justice.
Bassem Abu Rahmah, a pillar of non-violence in the village of Bil’in, was shot in the chest with a high-velocity teargas canister and died on his way to hospital in 2009. Picture credit: Lazar Simeonov.People say that time heals, but the Abu Rahmah family feels as though it is living in a recurring nightmare from which there is no respite. Their nightmare is set in the West Bank village of Bil’in, which has been cut into pieces by Israel’s “separation” wall.
It is a unique village: On the front lines of the conflict with Israel, it has also been the site of weekly non-violent protests since the wall was constructed 2005. It even has its own website, which describes “a Palestinian village that is struggling to exist” and “fighting to safeguard its land, its olive trees, its resources … its liberty”.
But what really makes the village stand out is the people that inhabit it – in particular, the Abu Rahmahs, whose misfortunes really began about three years ago.
All six Abu Rahmah siblings were non-violent activists – only four of them are left.
Their tale begins in July 2008, when one of them, Ashraf, was detained by Israeli soldiers in the nearby village of Ni’lin. The soldiers tied him up, blindfolded him and, as their commander watched, shot him in the foot at close range with a rubber-coated steel bullet.
The term “rubber-coated” can be misleading; this type of ammunition is consistently mislabelled as ‘rubber’ bullets by the army, leading people to think that it is relatively harmless. But the rubber coating is, in fact, paper-thin and encases a marble-sized steel ball that can break bones or even kill.
The whole incident was captured on video, making it impossible for the Israeli military to deny responsibility.
Ashraf’s case went to the Israeli Supreme Court where a strong indictment against the commander was unanimously ordered. The soldier who committed the deed was put under investigation, but just two weeks later the charges against him were dropped and he resumed duty.
Bassem’s story
On April 17, 2009, Bassem Abu Rahmah, another of the siblings, made his way to the front of the weekly protest as he did every Friday. Reaching the wall, he stood before dozens of Israeli soldiers, who have a reputation for regularly using violent means of “crowd dispersal” against non-violent protesters.
On this occasion, the Israeli military used a new type of high-velocity teargas canister – the sheer velocity of which, unlike the normal canisters, made it nearly impossible for the protesters to evade them.
Several Israeli activists had become trapped between two fences and, disorientated by the teargas, were unable to escape. Bassem shouted in Hebrew at the soldiers that they were shooting teargas at their own people and should stop for a minute to allow the Israeli activists to get out from between the fences.
One of the Israeli soldiers responded to Bassem’s request by shooting a high-velocity teargas canister directly at his chest from a distance of about 40 metres.
By this point, many of the protesters and media had been driven away by the billowing teargas, but those still present heard a desperate call for an ambulance. There was no ambulance in the village that day and, after, a few drawn out minutes, a small, beat-up car sped down the road to the spot where Bassem lay. As it approached, the soldiers shot at it with teargas canisters. Bassem’s limp body, his chest covered with blood, was carried to the car and driven the 30 minutes to the nearest hospital.
He died before reaching it.
It was the first time that somebody had been killed at one of Bil’in’s weekly demonstrations and it soon became clear that Bassem had left a considerable mark not just on his family, but on the entire village.
Over coffee at her home, I told Bassem’s mother in my broken Arabic that my own family in the US had heard about what had happened to Bassem on the news and that people all over the world knew of his story. It seemed to offer her little comfort.
I remembered how Bassem had been the first person in the village to introduce himself to me, how he seemed to know everyone and was always going from one place to another, helping people and spending time with his friends.
He worked with the Bil’in Popular Committee, which espouses non-violent and creative ways to attract attention to their cause, was deeply committed to non-violence and always spoke peacefully to the Israeli soldiers.
Who will look out for them?
I also recalled how on that fateful afternoon, Bassem had joined the other villagers and activists at the centre of Bil’in as they chanted slogans and began to walk towards the village’s annexed land.
As always, Bassem was initially at the back of the crowd, trying to finish a conversation before the march began. But he had a long stride and, with his mobile phone blasting Arabic music, he had passed everyone by the time we reached the wall.
As he walked past me, told me, as he always did, to be careful and warned my friend to look out for me during the protest. But who was looking out for him?
Bassem’s family were devastated by his death, so when I heard about the death of his sister, Jawaher, a few days ago, I immediately thought of them.
Jawaher died on New Year’s Eve as a result of inhaling teargas at the village’s weekly protest.
There has been some speculation over the type of teargas used on that day, with other activists emphasising the large quantity and unusually strong effect it had on them.
The Abu Rahmah family has been left to deal with yet more injustice, grief and loss.
Waiting for justice
Israel began building settlements on the village’s land during the 1980s. Gradually more and more land was confiscated, until, in late 2004, the Israeli army ordered the construction of the “separation” wall, which would annex almost 60 per cent of Bil’in’s land. The land, which was mostly agricultural, was essential to the economy of the village.
Soon after the decision to build the wall was announced, the Bil’in Committee of Popular Resistance Against the Wall and Settlements (Bil’in Popular Committee) was formed and in February 2005, the weekly non-violent demonstrations against the wall began. The have continued ever since, despite the harsh reactions of the Israeli military, which has, among other things, raided the homes of and arrested protest organisers in the middle of the night.
The village has had some success in its legal battle to get its land back. At one point, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that construction on the nearby settlement of Matityahu had to be stopped and ordered the path of the wall to be moved back – returning almost half of its land to the village.
But, like many court orders impacting the occupied territories, this was never carried out. Construction continued on the nearby settlements and the Supreme Court reached a new decision, whereby only about 10 per cent of the land would be returned to the people of Bil’in.
Even this ruling, however, has not been carried out and for the people of Bil’in the struggle continues in the hope that the deaths of Bassem and Jawaher Abu Rahmah will not have been in vain.
9 January 2011 | International Solidarity Movement, Ramona
Hani Abu Haikal and his family live in Hebron’s H2, which is under Israeli control. They are part of the 30,000 Palestinians that live among 500 settlers in this part of the city. Life for Palestinians inside H2 is extremely difficult, with many of them facing settler harassment, movement constraints, and a large military and police presence serving settlers’ interests, even if most attacks are directed at Palestinians.
Hani and his family have to deal with all these issues, in addition to the fact that they live deep inside the Tel Rumeida settlement, surrounded by settlers on all sides. Only around five Palestinian families remain inside, while many have left because of the troubles they faced. The situation got especially bad during the second Intifada, in 2000, when there was a curfew imposed on Palestinians for three years. This meant that Palestinians could not work, or go to school, among other much needed activities needed to survive.
Many restrictions continue to exist for families inside the settlement. They cannot have guests without getting prior permission from Israeli authorities. This includes family member and friends, and even ambulances and doctors. Israeli authorities reject around 60% of their requests for visitors. This makes life for Hani’s family very difficult, especially for his mother who is very sick and old. She cannot walk, so she needs to have doctors come inside the settlement to visit her.
There are many other restrictions that Hani’s family has to deal with. Palestinians have no permission to own cars so they have to walk everywhere, and carry everything to their home. Settlers on the other hand, can have as many cars as they want. Palestinians inside the settlement live under martial law, while the Israelis live under civilian law. Palestinians constantly face harassment at the hands of settlers. Settlers have beaten up Hani’s son, without any repercussions. In the past, when Hani was able to own cars, settlers burned more than six of his cars. Settlers have also repeatedly damaged and burned his land.
Recently, an empty Palestinian home was taken over by settlers. The Palestinian owner of the house has an Israeli Supreme Court order to evacuate the settlers, but the police have not followed the order.
On Wednesday, January 5, Hani had a visit from the recently appointed Hebron governor, Kamil Hamid as well as Palestinian Authority doctors, who came to visit Hani’s sick mother. As is the case with all people coming to visit his home, he had to get special permission from Israeli authorities to allow the visit. It took two weeks to get the permission. It was also promised that the military would protect the governor from settler attacks.
Things did not turn out so smoothly, however. The governor faced settler verbal and physical attacks, without any protection from the military or police. Baruch Marcel, the founder of the extreme right-wing Jewish National Front party, who also lives in the Tel Rumeida settlement, lead and gathered all the settlers. The Israeli military and police stood by while the attacks were happening, and Hani and his body guards had to rush over to protect the governor.
After the governor, the doctors and Hani were able to get inside his home safely, they were trapped inside for three hours while the settlers’ mob remained outside. Soldiers tried to get the governor to leave the building from the back, but he refused, and said “I am a governor, I am not a thief. I come with special permission, under Israeli protection and I’m supposed to come back as I came in.”
For Hani, this incident was indicative of the troubles Palestinians face in Hebron’s H2. “I liked what happened because the governor saw what our real lives are like here” Hani said. It was an opportunity for the governor to see the unfair treatment that Palestinians receive from Israeli authorities. Even with all the preparation that went into having the governor visit Hani’s home, he was still not provided with the protection he was promised. This shows that the Israeli system is unjust in its treatment of Palestinians, even if they are high government officials.
According to Hani, the occupation’s strength comes from soldiers, settlers, and police working together to uphold the occupation. There is a misconception that the Israeli soldiers and police uphold the system of law and justice, and protect everyone equally. He says. “Anyone who lives here like me knows that the soldiers, the police and the settlers are a team that work together.” he says. “The settlers, they attack us. The solders give settlers protection. And the police arrests us.” This team works together to implement and enforce Israel’s efforts at population transfer of Palestinians from areas Israel wants to control. Life is made so difficult for Palestinians that they often have no other choice but to leave.
