Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2002, pages 11, 20, 23

Special Report

 

Or Commission Warns Barak, Ben-Ami to Prepare for Further Investigation

 

By Jonathan Cook

Israel’s former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and his security minister, Shlomo Ben-Ami, were warned Feb. 27 by a panel of judges that they are suspected of having acted illegally during its investigations into events at the start of the al-Aqsa intifada.

The Or Commission sent both men letters of warning, advising them to hire the services of a lawyer and prepare for further investigation. The commission, which also sent the letter to nine of the country’s top police officers and three Israeli Arab politicians, has the power to recommend criminal prosecutions against anyone it warns.

The high number of warnings—a total of 14—surprised most legal experts.

Justice Theodor Or has spent the past year examining events in the first days of October 2000 which led to 13 Palestinian citizens being shot dead by the country’s police force during protests in the northern Galilee region (see July 2001 Washington Report, p. 8). The demonstrations were staged in a show of support for their ethnic kin in the occupied territories and to protest five decades of discrimination inside Israel.

Evidence to the commission has shown that, although the demonstrators were unarmed, Israeli police used rubber bullets and live ammunition from the outset. The police commanders also deployed an anti-terror squad of snipers in two towns in the Galilee, Nazareth and Umm al-Fahm, where a total of six people died. Some testimonies, including from police officers, hinted at a shoot-to-kill policy.

The conflicting versions of events presented by Barak, Ben-Ami and the police command almost certainly have persuaded the commission that some or all of them provided false testimony.

The Arab politicians receiving warnings included MK Azmi Bishara of the National Democratic Assembly, who—after the Knesset stripped him of his parliamentary immunity—currently is on trial for sedition over speeches he made in Israel and Syria.

The two others were from the Islamic Movement: MK Abdul Malik Dehamshe and Sheikh Raed Salah, who leads the militant northern wing of the party. All three are being investigated by the commission on suspicion that they incited the demonstrations that led to the deaths.

The Or Commission will now change tack. During the first phase of its investigations, which ended in February, the 350 witnesses were questioned only by the three judges on the panel. In the second phase, the proceedings will look more like a series of criminal trials, with each warned individual facing cross-examination by hostile lawyers. Although many embarrassing revelations already have emerged, this phase is likely to dig much deeper.

Barak in particular will face a hard time. In his questioning last November he lavishly praised the police and directed his venom at a tiny “extremist” minority among Israel’s one million Palestinian citizens that were bent on “deliberately fomenting violence.”

On other points, Barak refused to go into details of what he termed “specific past events.” This exasperated the panel and led one judge, Shimon Shamir, to point out: “We are a commission of past inquiry.” Justice Or finally cut short Barak’s testimony after less than a full day.

Hanging over the inquiry is the legal shadow of the Kahan Commission, which investigated the 1982 massacre of Palestinian refugees in the Lebanese camps of Sabra and Shatilla. Kahan found that then-Defense Minister and current Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was indirectly responsible for the killing spree because he allowed gangs of Christian Phalangists to enter the camps.

Similarly, Or could find Barak and Ben-Ami accountable for failing to prevent all or some of the 13 deaths.

Regarding Barak, the commission found five faults, including: “In his capacity as prime minister, he was not sufficiently aware of the changes taking place in the Arab community in Israel during his time in office. These changes created a substantial possibility that riots would break out on a large scale.

“One example of this failure was the fact that he ignored requests and recommendations to hold a meeting with all the relevant bodies and institutions [regarding the situation in the Israeli Arab sector].”

Another fault highlighted in the letter was: “On Oct. 2, he ordered the police to use every means to keep the roads open, with special reference to the Wadi Ara road (Route 65), thus ignoring the many casualties, including fatalities, that could have, and should have, been anticipated as a result of the order.”

Lawyers for the victims’ families are likely to concentrate on this point, having already brought to Justice Or’s attention a radio interview Barak gave on the morning before the majority of deaths occurred in the Galilee.

In it the former prime minister said that he had met with the police commanders the night before and given them the “green light” to take whatever action was necessary to preserve the rule of law. Precisely what was said at the meeting is still unclear.

Ben-Ami, who was the minister in charge of the police as well as foreign minister, was also warned by the inquiry over five faults. They included that “he did not do enough to make sure the police would be ready to handle widespread riots,” and that “he was not sufficiently aware of the dangers involved in the use of rubber-coated bullets in dispersing riots, and did not take the necessary measures to prevent or limit their use during the riots.”

When questioned by Or, Ben-Ami pointed the finger of blame at his two most senior police officers: the national police chief, Yehuda Wilk, and the commander of the northern force, Alik Ron. He testified that both had kept him in the dark and that Wilk had refused to obey his order that the police be disarmed after it became clear live ammunition was being used against Israeli citizens.

Ben-Ami further blamed senior officers for exaggerating the violence of the protests in the Galilee to justify their use of live ammunition.

Wilk and Ron, both now retired, are suspected of 11 failures. Ron was harshly criticised both for deciding to bring in the snipers to Umm al-Fahm and for then directing their fire. The inquiry said: “Seven people were wounded and one killed as result.”

Justice Or added that Ron’s instructions to marksmen to fire at stone-throwers were “without justification and in violation of the rules governing the use of live fire by the police.” The blunt language used when detailing Ron’s failures suggests that the inquiry is likely to take a harsh line on him in its final report.

The commission, however, does not have the power to prosecute or punish; it can only make recommendations to the government. All previous recommendations by commissions of inquiry concerning individuals have been implemented. But Justice Or’s inquiry has touched on extremely sensitive issues, particularly as it has been conducted during the Palestinian uprising in the West Bank and Gaza.

In a sign of how polarized Israeli society has become, the current security minister, Uzi Landau, said the day after the warnings were issued that he did not believe the government was obligated to abide by Justice Or’s final recommendations. Landau has repeatedly supported the police during the inquiry.

Tensions between the Jewish majority and the Arab minority have hit rock bottom, with a rising tide of right-wing opinion suggesting that Israel’s Palestinian population is a “fifth column.” This has included calls by extreme right-wing cabinet members such as Binyamin Elon and Avigdor Lieberman for the expulsion of the Arab minority.

Jonathan Cook is a free-lance journalist based in Nazareth.

< Prev		Next >