INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION chemin du pommier 5 1218 LE GRAND-SACONNEX / GENEVA (switzerland)  telephone  (41.22) 919 41 50 - fax (41.22) 919 41 60 - e-mail postbox@mail.ipu.org

 CASE No. PAL/ 04 - HUSSAM KHADER - PALESTINE

Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 176^th session

(Manila, 8 April 2005)

   The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

      Referring to the case of Mr. Hussam Khader, an incumbent member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, as outlined in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/176/13(b)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 175^th session (October 2004),

 Taking account of the letters from the Diplomatic Adviser to the Speaker of the Knesset, dated 13 January, 9 and 29 March 2005; taking also account of communications from the source, dated 24 and 31 March 2005,

 Referring to the expert report drawn up by Mr. Simon Foreman and commissioned by the Committee on the trial of Mr. Marwan Barghouti,

 Recalling that Mr. Hussam Khader was arrested on 17 March 2003 at his home in Balata refugee camp by the Israeli defence forces and transferred to an Israeli detention facility and has been held by the Israeli Prison Service since 19 June 2003; noting that, according to the Israeli Prison Service, he is at present being held in the Hadarim detention centre in a restricted wing and has continued to direct terrorist acts from inside the detention centre, 

      Considering that the sources have always affirmed that Mr. Khader's right to receive visits from his family and his lawyers is extremely limited, and noting in this respect that, according to the information provided by the Israeli Prison Service, Mr. Khader received only one visit of a family member in 2004 and had three visits of family members (his brother and his children) since the beginning of 2005; from his arrest until November 2004, he received the visit of one member of the Knesset and two visits of his lawyers, and again two visits of his lawyers since the beginning of 2005; considering that, according to the authorities, there is no formal ban on visitors seeing him; visits from abroad are subject to approval by the Israeli Prison Service; between 19 August and 19 September 2004 Mr. Khader was not allowed to receive visitors for disciplinary reasons; moreover, visiting arrangements were reviewed from time to time by the Israeli Prison Service,

 Noting with respect to visiting rights that:

• a petition has been filed by an Israeli organisation demanding that permission be granted for contact visits of political prisoners by their children, which is set for hearing on 5 May 2005;

• according to the source, Mr. Khader's defence counsel sent a preliminary petition to the Minister of Justice seeking removal of the ban on his meeting his client; 

• on 1 September 2004, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that the right of prisoners and detainees to meet their lawyers was guaranteed, including those on hunger strike, and declared that barring such meetings was unlawful,

 Recalling that Mr. Khader has repeatedly complained of ill-treatment, constant prison transfers and prison conditions which prompted him to go on a nine-day hunger strike in March 2004 and a further hunger strike, together with other Palestinian prisoners, in August 2004,

      Considering that Mr. Khader is charged with (i) performing a service for an unauthorised association on account of his having at the end of 2002 approached Al Amir Sualama to reorganise the activities of the Martyrs of the Al-Aqsa Brigades; (ii) attempting wilfully to cause death on account of his having helped Amir Sualama to organise a suicide attack which finally did not take place owing to the arrest of the designated terrorist; (iii) failing to prevent three offences (intentionally causing death) on account of his not having notified the authorities of three planned terrorist attacks of which  he had been informed by Amir Sualama, and in which two military officers were killed; noting that Mr. Khader denies all charges and has affirmed that Amir Sualama's statements against him were obtained under duress; considering that, according to the source, the prosecution successfully objected to the defence counsel's demand to question Amir Sualama, who is serving five life sentences, about the methods used by the authorities to obtain information from him; according to the authorities, in his testimony before the court Sualama claimed that senior persons in the Palestinian Authority had asked him to incriminate Mr. Khader in the event of his being detained; however, this was not corroborated by the testimonial material and totally contradicts his statements at his own trial, 

 Considering that, in reply to the allegation of the source that the defence counsel was denied access to prosecution material, the authorities stated that all public investigation material had been placed at Mr. Khader's disposal; however, since he was questioned by the General Security Services (GSS), a certificate of secrecy was issued that applied secrecy to the identity and sources of information, methods of action, capabilities and technical means, work procedures, and information-gathering means in the GSS; however, no conviction could be based on confidential material since the court did not receive material classified as secret; moreover, the defence had not applied for removal of the secrecy, 

 Considering that, with respect to the publicity of the trial hearings, the authorities have stated that hearings have been open with the exception of those at which GSS personnel have testified; those hearings were held, with the consent of Mr. Khader and his defence, in camera; according to the source, only following a petition to the court by Mr. Khader's counsel were media coverage and access permitted, 

 Noting that, according to the authorities, the prosecution will have completed its case in the approaching deliberations, after which the defence will present its case,

 Bearing in mind that, as a result of the recent election of a new President in the Palestinian Authority, the Israeli authorities have indicated their willingness to re-establish cooperation with the Palestinian authorities,  

1. Thanks the Speaker of the Knesset and his Diplomatic Adviser for the information provided and their cooperation;

2. Reiterates that the legal arguments put forward in Mr. Foreman’s report on the trial of Mr. Barghouti in respect of the forcible transfer of Palestinians to Israeli territory for the purpose of their prosecution, and the incompatibility of certain interrogation methods and conditions of detention with international human rights law, also apply mutatis mutandis in the case of Mr. Khader; and therefore can but once again urge the Israeli authorities to transfer Mr. Khader to the custody of the Palestinian authorities with a view to his being tried by them in accordance with international law;

3.  Notes that Mr. Khader has been held in restricted prison sections throughout his detention, and would be interested to receive information as to how he might have directed terrorist attacks from such a location; 

4. Notes with concern the extremely limited visiting rights not only of his family but also of his counsel, and fears that such restriction may greatly hamper his ability to defend himself and, in addition, may be at variance with the ruling of the Supreme Court of 1 September 2004 on the right of detainees and prisoners to meet their lawyers; would appreciate any observation in this regard;

5. Notes with deep concern that the prosecution case essentially rests on the statement of one person, who himself does not appear to be a credible witness;

6. Wishes to ascertain whether any investigation has been instituted into Mr. Khader's complaint of ill-treatment in detention, especially during interrogation;  

7. Decides to send a legal practitioner to observe the remaining hearings in Mr. Khader’s trial, and requests the Secretary General to take the necessary steps to this end and to inform the authorities and Mr. Khader's defence accordingly;

8. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held on the occasion of the 113^th IPU Assembly (October 2005).

STATEMENT OF SUPPORT FROM ALGERIAN WORKERS PARTY AND DIALIGUE MAGAZINE

 March 2005'

On 9 March 2005 a Parliamentary Conference was held in Algiers at the initiative of the Algerian Workers party and Dialogue : a political review of discussion between Arab and Jewish activists of Palestine.

DIALOGUE magazine, which has promoted widely the campaign for the unconditional right of return, of all Palestinian refugees to their villages and homes, calls on all labour and human rights activists around the world to endorse this appeal and to lobby your elected officials in national parliaments to join the broad-based international campaign to free Hussam Khader.

Statement signed by: Louisa Hanoune, Deputy of the Algerian Popular Assembly; Alexandre Anor, Deputy of the Socialist Party of Geneva (Switzerland); Nancy Wohlforth, Co-chair of Pride at Work (AFL-CIO), Secretary,  Treasurer of OPEIU (titles listed for id. Only); Andy Griggs, Chair, Human Rights Committee of the United Teachers of Los Angeles Trade Union (title listed for id. Only), and hundreds of others.

For further information, please click here

INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION  chemin du pommier 5 1218 LE GRAND-SACONNEX / GENEVA (switzerland)   telephone  (41.22) 919 41 50 - fax (41.22) 919 41 60 - e-mail postbox@mail.ipu.org

COMMITTEE ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF PARLIAMENTARIANS

CASE No. PAL/ 04 - HUSSAM KHADER - PALESTINE

Decision adopted by the Committee at its 108^th session

(Geneva, 24 - 27 January 2005)

  The Committee,

   Referring to the outline of the case of Mr. Hussam Khader, an incumbent member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, and to the resolution adopted by the Governing Council at its 175^th session (October 2004),

   Having been informed of the conversation the Secretary General had with the Speaker of the Knesset during his visit to Israel in November 2004 as regards the case of Mr. Khader and the possibility of an IPU delegation meeting with him; and taking account of the letter dated 13 January 2005 sent to the Secretary General by the Diplomatic Advisor to the Speaker of the Knesset, and of the communications from one of the sources, dated 4 and 22 January 2005,

   Referring to the expert report drawn up by Mr. Simon Foreman and commissioned by the Committee on the trial of Mr. Marwan Barghouti, as endorsed by the Governing Council,

   Considering that the Israeli authorities have not agreed to the on-site mission which the Committee proposed so as to enable it to clarify several questions concerning Mr. Khader’s situation, but that they have offered to provide a written answer to its queries; and referring in this respect to the list of issues of concern which the Secretary General forwarded to the Speaker on 9 December 2004,

   Considering that in his communication of 13 January 2005, the Diplomatic Advisor to the Speaker stated that the proceedings against Mr. Khader had not yet ended, that there was no formal prohibition on visitors seeing him, that visits from abroad were subject to approval by the Israeli Prison Service, that between 19 August and 19 September 2004 Mr. Khader was not allowed to receive visitors for disciplinary reasons, and that visiting arrangements were reviewed from time to time by the Israeli Prison Service,

   Considering the following new information provided by the sources as regards Mr. Khader’s conditions of detention and the stage of the proceedings:

 -        Since Mr. Khader’s arrest in March 2003, only his children have been able to visit him, first in December 2004 and again in January 2005.  They are, however, not allowed any physical contact, and have to sit behind a glass partition and speak to their father through a telephone;

 -        No other family members have been allowed any visits, and the three requests for permission to allow Mr. Khader’s mother to visit him were all rejected;

 -        However, Mr. Ahmed Tibi, a member of the Knesset, was allowed to visit Mr. Khader on 16 December 2004;

 -        Several hearings have taken place before the Salem military court, the latest one on 28 November 2004, and further hearings are scheduled for 6 and 20 March 2005, but no date has reportedly as yet been set for the trial itself,

   Noting that a petition has been filed by an Israeli organisation demanding that permission be granted for physical contact during visits of political prisoners with their children, that it is currently pending before the Israeli Supreme Court, and that a hearing is set for 5 May 2005,

   Bearing in mind that as a result of the recent election of a new President in the Palestinian Authority, the Israeli authorities have indicated their willingness to re-establish cooperation with the Palestinian authorities,

 1.       Thanks the Speaker of the Knesset and his Diplomatic Advisor for the information provided; and notes, however, with regret that most of the points raised in the list referred to above have not been addressed;

 2.       Reiterates that the legal arguments put forward in Mr. Foreman’s report on the trial of Mr. Barghouti in respect of the forcible transfer of Palestinians to Israeli territory for the purpose of their prosecution, and the incompatibility of certain interrogation methods and conditions of detention with international human rights law, apply mutatis mutandis also in the case of Mr. Khader; and can only once again urge therefore, the Israeli authorities to transfer Mr. Khader to the custody of the Palestinian authorities with a view to his being prosecuted by them in accordance with international law;

 3.       Infers from the letter of the Diplomatic Advisor that, subject to the approval of the Israeli Prison Service, visits from abroad may take place; and requests the Secretary General to enquire about the possibility of a Committee member or two travelling to Israel to meet Mr. Khader and the competent authorities, as the parliamentary authorities see fit;

 4.       Decides to send an observer to Mr. Khader’s trial, and requests the Secretary General to take the necessary steps to this end;

 5.       Decides to continue examining this case at its next session, to be held during the 112^th IPU Assembly (April 2005).

That this House is alarmed that since 1967 more than 600,000 Palestinians, including women and children, are believed to have been detained by Israeli military and security forces, with an estimated 7,000 Palestinians currently being held in custody; notes that numerous human rights organisations continue to report inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees as well as the use of torture; is concerned about an apparent culture of impunity on the part of the Israeli authorities in respect of these matters; calls upon the UK Government to take every measure possible to ensure that Israel complies with its international legal obligations, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention; and further calls upon the UK Government to request that the Israel authorities address, as a matter of urgency, the serious legal concerns raised by the Inter-Parliamentary Union in the cases of the imprisoned Palestinian Parliamentarians Marwan Barghouti and Hussam Khader.

The following motion (an EDM) on PALESTINIAN PRISONERS IN ISRAELI JAILS was tabled in the British House of Commons on 30 November 2004. To date it has been signed by 83  British Members of Parliament.

An Early Day Motion (EDM) in the British House of Commons, is the term used to describe notices of motions given by Members of Parliament that are not generally expected to be debated. Effectively, the tabling of an EDM is a device to draw attention to an issue, and to elicit support for it by the means of inviting other Members to add their signatures to the motion. EDMs can often attract a great deal of publicity, and many people regard them as a gauge of opinion.

http://edm.ais.co.uk/weblink/html/motion.html/ref=243