Adalah, High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens in Israel and Victims' Families' to Ministry of Justice: Mahash's Failure to Investigate the October 2000 Killings is Extremely Dangerous, is Clearly Illegal, and Shows Contempt for the Victims and their Families
On 21 August 2005, the Chairperson of the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens in Israel Mr. Shawqi Khatib, members of the Victims' Families Committee Mr. Hassan Asleh and Mr. Abdel Menem Abu Saleh, and Adalah Attorney Marwan Dalal met with Minister of Justice Ms. Tzipi Livni, State Attorney Mr. Eran Shendar, and Director of the Ministry of Justice's Police Investigation Unit (Mahash) Mr. Herzl Shabiro, to discuss Mahash's investigations into the killings of 13 unarmed Palestinian citizens of Israel during the October 2000 protest demonstrations. The meeting, which was arranged at the request of the High Follow-Up Committee for Arab Citizens in Israel, was held in the Ministry of Immigrant Absorption.
At the meeting, Mr. Khatib stressed the centrality of attaining justice for the victims of the October 2000 protest demonstrations to the Arab minority in Israel, and the essential need to conduct a serious investigation into the killings and to bring the police commanders and officers involved to trial. Mr. Khatib emphasized the fact that, thus far, no police officer has been charged in relation to the killings. Mr. Asleh expressed his personal pain and that of the victims' families, adding that the impunity enjoyed by the police in relation to the killings contributes to Arab citizens' lack of trust in their work. Mr. Abu Saleh also expressed his personal pain at the loss of his son, and especially the difficulty of knowing that the individual whom he believes to be his son's killer, Police Sergeant Guy Raif, has not been charged for his son's death. During the meeting, Adalah briefed the Minister of Justice on the problematic nature of Mahash's conduct, including its failure to investigate killings that took place in October 2000 with any degree of seriousness and submitted a letter to the Minister, detailing Adalah's arguments.
The Minister of Justice responded that the authorities are doing their best to fulfill their duties faithfully, and that there is no malevolent intention on behalf of the state not to conduct a serious investigation into the deaths that occurred during the October 2000 events. The director of Mahash and the State Attorney denied the allegations relating to Mahash's failures and problematic conduct. The State Attorney, who was serving as the director of Mahash in October 2000, commented that Arab citizens did not cooperate with Mahash after the killings. Adalah replied that the State Attorney's position was legally and factually inaccurate in this regard, and that even if the assumption that Arab citizens did not cooperate with Mahash were true, Mahash remains legally bound to initiate an investigation into the killings of the 13 citizens of Israel, including identifying the police officers involved in the killings, collecting objective data from the field and conducting a serious and intensive investigation into each case. Adalah also noted that the Official Commission of Inquiry into the Clashes between Security Forces and Israeli Citizens in October 2000 (the Or Commission) was appointed on 8 November 2000, over a month after the first killing occurred on 1 October 2000. Moreover, in the time between the first killing and the appointment of the Or Commission, no serious or significant step was taken by Mahash to investigate the events, Adalah noted.
During the meeting, the Minister of Justice asked whether or not it would be possible to exhume the bodies of three of the victims, as requested by Mahash, in order to advance the investigation in these specific cases. Adalah responded that an answer to this question could not be provided before Mahash presents the details of the investigations that it has conducted thus far. Adalah noted that a previous request to exhume the body of a fourth victim, Asil Asleh, was withdrawn by the state following the presentation of Adalah's arguments before the Magistrate Court in Akka (Acre) that the exhumation would violate the right to dignity of both the deceased and his family. In that case, Mahash had asked to exhume the body of Asil Asleh four years after his killing, without conducting any investigation following the publication of the Or Commission's Report. Adalah clarified that, in accordance with Supreme Court decisions, other investigative measures must be exhausted before the exhumation of a body is conducted. This principle applies especially in cases such as these, where the requests to exhume the bodies were submitted years after the killings.
In response to the allegation made by Mahash representatives that, without exhuming the bodies of the victims, it will not be possible to identify the police officers responsible for the deaths, Adalah cited the comments made by retired Justice Theodor Or, on 1 September 2004, a year after the publication of the Or Commission's Report. In these remarks he discussed Mahash's failures, both following the killings in October 2000 and following the publication of the Commission's Report, which recommended investigations into the killings. In addition, Justice Or emphasized that the working premise of the Or Commission was that indictments need to be made based on its findings:
In general, Mahash did not collect evidence relating to the events surrounding the killings of the citizens, did not gather evidence at the scene and did not attempt to locate any of the police officers who were involved in the incidents shortly after the incidents occurred… The Commission of Inquiry recommended that Mahash conduct an investigation into a number of incidents in which 13 people died. The intention was that, following the investigation, a decision would be reached over whether indictments should be filed and if so against whom. It is becoming clear that, to date, no conclusion has been reached over whether indictments should be filed and if so against whom. It is becoming clear that, to date, no conclusion has been reached over whether indictments are to be filed in relation to any of the events that Mahash was charged with investigating. The explanation given is that Mahash lacks sufficient personnel, and that only when additional manpower was provided did the pace of the investigation accelerate. In light of the grave results of the events that Mahash is charged with investigating, in light of the fact that the testimonies obtained by investigators on behalf of the Commission and by the Commission itself were always available to everyone, including Mahash investigators, as long ago as when the Commission was performing its work; and in light of the fact that over a year has passed since the Commission made its recommendations, it is regrettable that the Mahash investigation has not accomplished more.
