Tag: B’Tselem

Judge Advocate General to B’Tselem: 0.22-caliber bullets are not crowd-control measures

B’Tselem

9 July 2009

The army does not classify 0.22 inch caliber bullets as a means to disperse demonstrators or quell disturbances, the Israeli Military’s Judge Advocate General, Brig. Gen. Avichai Mandelblit, informed B’Tselem.

Since the end of 2008, security forces in the West Bank have used 0.22-caliber bullets as an additional means, along with the firing of rubber-coated metal bullets and tear-gas, to disperse demonstrators. In addition, in media statements the IDF Spokesperson referred to 0.22-caliber bullets as a crowd-control measure.

As a result of the use of 0.22 bullets, at least two unarmed Palestinians were killed: on 13 February 2009, ‘Az a-Din al-Jamal, age 14, in Hebron, and on 5 June 2009, ‘Aqel Sror, age 35 in a demonstration in the village of Ni’lin. Dozens of persons have been wounded, some seriously. To the best of B’Tselem’s knowledge, since the killing of Sror, 0.22-caliber bullets have not been fired at demonstrators in Ni’lin.

B’Tselem had written to the Judge Advocate General, demanding that the army cease firing this ammunition at unarmed demonstrators in the West Bank. In its letter, the organization pointed out that, apparently, soldiers and officers in the field view 0.22-caliber ammunition as a means to disperse demonstrators, which led to its widespread and dangerous use. From observations at demonstrations in Ni’lin in recent months, B’Tselem found that 0.22-caliber bullets were not fired in life-threatening situations, but during clashes with demonstrators, some of whom were throwing stones at Israeli forces. B’Tselem provided the JAG with video footage of Border Police officers firing 0.22-caliber bullets in situations in which their lives were not in danger.

In his response, the JAG stated that the rules for firing 0.22-caliber bullets in the West Bank are “stringent, and comparable to the rules for opening fire with ‘live’ ammunition.” He added that, “If misleading information regarding classification of this means [0.22-caliber bullets] has been transmitted to the media or various organizations, it was done by mistake or due to a misunderstanding.” The Judge Advocate General further stated that, “Recently, the open fire regulations that apply to this means have been clarified to the relevant operational elements in the Central Command. Soon the Command will make an evaluation of the situation, headed by a senior Command official, in which framework the lessons relating to the use of this means that have accumulated in recent months will be examined.”

IDF’s JAG says .22-caliber rounds should not be used to disperse protesters

Amos Harel | Ha’aretz

12 July 2009

The army does not classify .22-inch caliber bullets as a suitable means to disperse demonstrators, the judge advocate general, Brig.-Gen. Avichai Mendelblit, told the human rights group B’Tselem yesterday. According to the organization, the use of .22-caliber bullets resulted in the death of at least two unarmed Palestinians. On February 13, Az a-Din al-Jamal, 14, was killed in Hebron; and on June 5, Aqel Sror, 35, was shot and killed in a demonstration in the village of Ni’lin. Dozens of people have been wounded from the bullets, some seriously. B’Tselem says since Sror’s death, 0.22-caliber bullets have not been fired at demonstrators in Ni’lin.

Yesterday morning, shots were fired at an Israeli car near Ramallah, south of the settlement of Ofra. The shooting did not result in casualties or damage.

Israeli High Court rules against Judge Advocate General’s “extremely unreasonable” decision

B’Tselem, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, Yesh Din

1 July 2009

The Israeli High Court ruled today in favor of changing the indictments filed against the soldier and commander who were involved in the shooting of a handcuffed detainee in Ni’lin, so as to reflect the gravity of the offenses. The human rights organizations who had filed the petition to change the indictments expressed satisfaction with the decision, saying that it conveys a crucial message that protection of human rights must be a primary consideration for law-enforcement agencies. The organizations said they hope that in the future, High Court intervention will not be necessary for military law-enforcement agencies to convey to soldiers and commanders an unequivocal message to safeguard human life and dignity.

However, the organizations voiced concern over the fact that even though the abuse of the handcuffed detainee was filmed and caused a public outcry, the High Court’s intervention was necessary for the army to take proper action against the offenders. They said that the many reports regarding violence by security forces in the Occupied Territories, accompanied by feeble responses of the military law-enforcement agencies, raise doubt as to the ability and commitment of the army’s command level to comply with essential moral and legal norms.

Background

In August 2008, Ashraf Abu Rahma petitioned the Israeli High Court of Justice – with the assistance of Israeli human rights organizations B’Tselem, ACRI, PCATI and Yesh Din – after having been shot by a soldier at close range while blindfolded. The petitioners demanded that the indictments filed against the soldier who fired the shot, Staff Sergeant L., and the platoon commander, lieutenant Col. Omri Borberg, be changed so as to reflect the severity of the offenses. Using a weapon to intimidate, and shooting a handcuffed detainee may amount to abuse of detainee under aggrevated circumstances, an offense that carries a penalty of seven years in prison.

Ashraf Abu Rahma is happy with the decision, although he feels it is too late, one year after the shooting. Because of the violence of Israeli soldiers in the service of the occupation, he says, there are hundreds of other similar cases to his own that go undocumented and continue to occur with impunity. On the 17th of April, 2009, his brother Bassem was shot with a tear gas canister by an Israeli soldier at a peaceful demonstration against the wall in Bil’in.

In the petition, attorneys Limor Yehuda and Dan Yakir from ACRI stated that the decision of the Military Prosecutor to charge the soldier and commander with “unbecoming conduct”, an offense which does not appear on criminal records, is highly unreasonable and conveys an alarming message of disrespect for human lives, laying the foundation for future incidents of abuse.

Ha’aretz: ‘Court: IDF must toughen charges for shooting of bound Palestinian’

Tomer Zarchin | Ha’aretz

1 July 2009

The High Court ordered the Military Advocate General on Wednesday to file harsher charges against an Israel Defense Forces officer who ordered a soldier to shoot a rubber-coated metal bullet at a bound Palestinian.

Lt. Col. Omri Burberg, the officer, and Staff Sgt. L., the soldier, were formally charged with “improper conduct” over the incident, which took place in the West Bank village of Na’alin last September.

Justices Ayala Procaccia, Amnon Rubinstein and Hanan Meltzer abstained from ruling Wednesday on what charges would be appropriate for the shooting.

They unanimously accepted a petition submitted by Ashraf Abu Rahmeh, 27, the victim, and four human rights organizations against the Military Advocate General, Avihai Mandelblit.

The petitioners had demanded that the charges against Burberg and the soldier be changed in order to reflect the “gravity of the acts.”

In response, the justices wrote: “The moral gap between the nature of the act described in the indictment and the manner of evaluation in the indictment – as the offense of ‘improper conduct’ – is so deep that it cannot stand.”

“The gravity of the incident from a normative-moral perspective is exaggerated and exceptional,” wrote Justice Procaccia in her ruling. “Staging such scare tactics toward a bound, handcuffed and blindfolded man indicates a deep deviation from the moral norms that all IDF soldiers, and especially senior commanders, are obligated to uphold.”

In his ruling, Justice Rubinstein quoted Israel’s first Prime Minister Davd Ben-Gurion, who said that the IDF’s strength stems from its morality. Rubinstein even went so far as to say that Burberg’s actions may qualify as a desecration of God’s name.

The incident came to light after the Israeli human rights group, B’Tselem, released a video taken of the shooting by a Palestinian youth

In the video, Burberg is seen holding Abu Rahmeh, while a soldier under his command shoots him at close range in the foot. The IDF’s criminal investigation division subsequently launched a probe into the incident.

Burberg’s attorneys on Wednesday said that at no point during the incident did he command the soldier to or imagine he would shoot the Palestinian, and that this is well-documented in the evidence.

The attorneys added that the High Court’s decision does not change the facts in the case and said they are convinced their client will be acquitted in a military court.

As part of a deal reached between the officer and the GOC Northern Command, Maj. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, Burberg announced his willingness to leave the army. Following this announcement, Mandelblit relayed that he had decided upon a lighter indictment for Burberg and his subordinate, that of “improper conduct,” one which did not give the pair a criminal record.

Prohibit live fire in circumstances that are not life-threatening in the West Bank

B’Tselem

18 June 2009

On Friday, 5 June 2009, ‘Aqel Sror, 35, was killed when a border policeman fired a live, 0.22 inch caliber bullet at his chest during a demonstration held in Ni’lin. Four other demonstrators were injured by 0.22 bullets that day. One of them suffered a severe wound to the spinal cord, which his physicians estimate will leave him permanently paralyzed.

B’Tselem’s investigation indicates that Sror, who was part of a group of youths who were throwing stones at border policemen, was shot while he ran to aid a young man who had been injured a few seconds earlier. The shot was fired by a Border Police sniper, from a distance of 40 to 50 meters away. Sror and the injured person whom he had gone to aid were struck in their torsos. B’Tselem demanded a criminal investigation in the matter.

0.22 bullets are live ammunition that used to be fired from a Ruger rifle. Their impact may be lower, but they do cause injury, at times very serious, and even death. For this reason, the former Judge Advocate General, Maj. Gen. Menachem Finkelstein, ordered that use of these bullets stop. The order was given in 2001 after several children in the Gaza Strip were killed by this ammunition, and after OC Central Command had already prohibited its use. At the time, Ha’aretz quoted an army official who saying that “the mistake was that the Ruger came to be seen as a means to disperse demonstrators, although it was originally intended to be a weapon to all intents and purposes.”

Surprisingly, a few months ago, the army returned to using this ammunition to disperse demonstrators, without giving any explanation for this sudden change in policy and without taking any measures to prevent the expected injury to civilians. Indeed, since then, 0.22 bullets have killed or injured many Palestinians in the West Bank, and also at least one foreigner. In February, ‘Az a-Din al-Jamal, 14, was killed in Hebron when after throwing stones with other youths. B’Tselem also knows of persons who were injured in Ni’lin, Bil’in, Jayyus, Bitunya, and Budrus. Most of the victims were struck in the legs, suffering light to moderate injuries.

Following the renewed use of 0.22 bullets, B’Tselem wrote to the Judge Advocate General in March warning of the potential danger lives in use of this ammunition to disperse demonstrations. The response of Maj. Yehoshua Gortler, of the Judge Advocate General’s Office, was received only in June, after ‘Aqel Sror was killed, and after another letter from B’Tselem.

In his response, Major Gortler states that the rules applying to 0.22 bullets are “comparable, in general, to the the Open-Fire Regulations applying to ‘ordinary’ live ammunition… The IDF does not consider the Ruger rifle a means to disperse demonstrators or persons engaged in public disturbances, and the weapon is not a substitute for means used to deal with public disturbances (such as stun grenades, rubber bullets, and so forth).”

This response does not reflect the reality in the field. B’Tselem’s observations at demonstrations in Ni’lin clearly indicate that security forces have consistently used 0.22 bullets since the end of 2008, and that they see them as an additional means to disperse demonstrators.

First, following the killing of ‘Aqel Sror, the IDF Spokesperson himself stated that soldiers had fired at demonstrators with a Ruger rifle, “which is a means to disperse demonstrators that fires ammunition similar to live ammunition but at low intensity.”

Second, soldiers frequently use 0.22 bullets along with other crowd-dispersal means, such as tear gas and stun grenades. This conduct indicates that soldiers in the field and their commanders see 0.22 bullets as one of the means available to them for dispersing demonstrators.

Third, soldiers often do not have any weapon suited to shooting rubber-coated metal bullets, which are intended for crowd dispersal. Rather, they only have 0.22 bullets. This situation is reflected in the number of demonstrators wounded by these bullets in Ni’lin: since the army renewed use of these bullets, at least 28 demonstrators have been injured.

Fourth, analysis of the repeated use of 0.22 bullets in demonstrations in Ni’lin clearly demonstrates that, in the vast majority of cases, neither soldiers nor other persons were in life-threatening situations, which is the only case in which it is permitted to use live ammunition.

In its letters to the Judge Advocate General, B’Tselem noted that treating 0.22 bullets as a means for dispersing demonstrators has led security forces to see this ammunition as non-lethal and harmless, whose use does not have be restricted. Accordingly, forces have increased use of it and have begun to fire it in non-life-threatening situations.

This incorrect perception is especially dangerous because soldiers are almost never held accountable for illegal use of weapons. The lack of accountability results from the Judge Advocate General’s Office’s policy of not opening Military Police investigations in cases in which Palestinians are killed or wounded, except in rare circumstances in which the operational investigation, made by the same soldiers who caused the injury, raises a suspicion of criminal conduct. This policy has led to very few investigations, and consequently grants impunity to soldiers who breach the law.

B’Tselem demands that the army immediately cease use of 0.22 ammunition in circumstances that are not life-threatening, and that measures be taken against members of the security forces who have opened fire in breach of the regulations, causing death or injury to civilians.