On January 6
th, 2021, an Israeli Military Court convicted human rights defender Issa Amro on one charge of assault, two charges of taking part in an illegal march, two charges of disrupting a soldier, and one charge of taking part in an illegal demonstration. All the incidents leading to the indictment involved peaceful activity on Amro’s behalf, followed by his assault by soldiers and the police, which in some cases required medical treatment. Amro is represented by HRDF-funded lawyers Adv. Gaby Lasky and Adv. Riham Nassra, who are considering appealing the verdict.
Amro was also acquitted of 12 other charges after the Prosecution failed to bring evidence to support its claims. The charges of which Amro was acquitted include assaulting a public officer, obstructing a soldier, incitement, entering a restricted area, assaulting a soldier, assault, damaging property, insulting a soldier, and violating a closed area order.
A sentencing hearing is scheduled for February 8
th, 2021.
After the verdict announcement Adv. Riham Nassra stated: "Activist Amro's acquittal of 12 of the 18 hefty charges levied against him is testament to the fact that from the outset, the trial was an attempt to silence and incriminate him for his non-violent acts of protest from 2010 to 2016. It is an example of how suppression of legitimate political activity comes in many forms, including via the law: Amro's trial and his conviction for six counts of disrupting a soldier — based on standing up for his rights, and taking part in unauthorized marches in Hebron in order to draw attention to the strife of Palestinians living under a regime of race-based separation — demonstrate that no trial can deliver justice to a Palestinian under the current reality of occupation and oppression".
Issa Amro is the founder and coordinator of “Youth Against Settlements” in Hebron and a UN recognized human rights defender, who has been a target of constant harassment by the Israeli army and the Hebron settlers as a direct result of his non-violent struggle against the Israeli occupation. On June 7
th, 2016, Amro was indicted on 18 charges of assaulting a public officer; obstructing a soldier; incitement; entering a restricted area; participating in an illegal march; assaulting a soldier; assault; property damage; and insulting a soldier.
In the verdict, the court dismissed the Defense's preliminary claims of selective enforcement and substantial delay in filing the charges, sometimes six years after the incident, which harmed the effectiveness of the defense.
Regarding the conviction of Amro in taking part in an illegal march and an illegal demonstration, the Judge stated: "[…] the defendant had participated on three different occasions in demonstrations of a political nature, illegally, as these demonstrations were held without a permit".
It should be noted that in the oPt, a demonstration of over ten people requires a permit from the military commander. The court dismissed the Defense's claims according to which during the demonstrations Amro was exercising his right to freedom of speech, and further dismissed the claim that there is no procedure available in order to apply for such a permit.
The incident leading to the conviction of assault, took place in August 2010, when Amro was near the outpost “Hill 18” outside the settlement of Kiryat Arba where a protest was taking place. He was taking testimonies from Palestinian families who were constantly being attacked by the outpost’s residents, when he received a call from the neighbors of the Palestinian family living in the house closest to the outpost, informing him that the family was under a stone-throwing attack. Amro called B’Tselem, which called the police, the Red Cross, and TIPH (Temporary International Presence in Hebron). However, the first to arrive was the Kiryat Arba Civilian Security Coordinator.
According to Amro's testimony in court, he was attacked by the security coordinator who was trying to prevent him from documenting the incident. He added that he would never attack the armed security coordinator as he was afraid to be shot by him. The judge asserted that he found Amro's testimony to be unreliable and decided to convict him of assault for allegedly "pushing" the security coordinator one time. During the incident, Border Police forces arrived and arrested Amro using violence, assaulting him in the jeep during the journey to the police station and inside the police station itself. He was released by a court order several days later.
The incident leading to the conviction of obstruction of a soldier took place in April 2012, when Amro was forcibly removed by soldiers from a house in Hebron. Amro was also initially charged with entering a closed area (which according to the indictment is owned by the Government of Israel) together with a group of activists who refused to vacate the premises. Amro claimed that he had rented the house from the Hebron Women’s Association, which had received it from the Hebron Municipality. Amro and the group had been cleaning the house when the soldiers showed up and demanded they vacate the premises. Twenty minutes later, the group was forcibly removed and Amro was arrested. He was released by a court order several days later. In a hearing on September 22
nd, 2019, the Defense presented the court with the signed contract between the Hebron Women’s Association and Amro, proving that there is no basis for the Military Prosecution’s claim that the house was a restricted area Amro could not enter.
The judge therefore acquitted Amro of entering a closed area. However, after establishing the fact that the house in question was not Israeli governmental property, and that the soldiers had no legal basis to order Amro to vacate the house, the judge still convicted Amro of disrupting a soldier on duty for his refusal to leave. It should be emphasized that such a ruling, which allows a person to be prosecuted for resisting an illegal order by a solider or officer would not take place in an Israeli civilian court.
In relation to the right to exercise freedom of expression and peaceful assembly under international law, the judge referred to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, stating that Israel does not recognize its application in the oPt, and that even if it did apply in the oPt as customary law, it has not been established by the defense that the Military Commander does not comply with the norms set in the convention. Of course, contrary to this assertion, the applicability of Israel’s human rights obligations in the oPt has been continuously asserted in UN resolutions, human rights treaty bodies and by the International Court of Justice.
As Amro’s case demonstrates, the military judicial system has been successful in efficiently restricting the freedom of speech and protest of many Palestinian human rights defenders who are left completely exposed to criminalization, detention and imprisonment by being systematically charged on various counts solely due to their peaceful activities in work promoting human rights in the oPt.
In the Military Court system, where human rights defenders and all Palestinians are denied basic due process rights on a regular basis, and the vast majority of those accused are found guilty, it is virtually impossible to refuse a plea bargain, as the alternative is almost certain conviction and more severe sentencing. That is why Amro's trial, which lasted for nearly five years, is a rare occurrence in the Military Courts. Therefore, we at the HRDF, are deeply proud of Adv. Lasky and Adv. Nassra, who after a long legal battle managed to acquit Amro of 12 charges out of the 18 of which he was accused.
HRDF stands in solidarity with Issa Amro and will continue to support Palestinian human rights defenders who peacefully oppose the Israeli occupation.
We welcome your interest and support. If you have any further questions regarding these and other matters please contact noa@hrdf.org.il
