The Popular Committee In Solidarity
With PLC Member Hussam Khader
& Palestinians Prisoners
COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE CASE OF
MR. HUSSAM KHADER, PALESTINIAN PARLIAMENTARIAN,
ILLEGALLY DETAINED IN ISRAEL FOR 2½ YEARS
Produced August 2005
1
Hussam Khader is an elected member of the Palestinian Legislative Council (the Palestinian
Parliament) representing Nablus district, and is a popular Palestinian leader from Fateh. He has
been illegally detained inside Israel by the Israeli Authorities since March 2003. Like thousands of
other Palestinian political prisoners, he has been subjected to physical and psychological torture,
inhuman detention conditions, and to legal proceedings that are in violation of international law,
including internationally accepted legal standards for him to be guaranteed a fair trial.
The Inter-Parliamentary Union, the Geneva-based international organization of Parliaments of
sovereign States representing 130 parliaments worldwide, including the Israeli Knesset, has
monitored Mr Khader's case for over 2 years. The IPU and the World Organisation Against Torture
(OMCT) have expressed concerns about Mr Khader’s arrest and trial proceedings, and the
violations of international law that constitute a grave violation of his right to a fair trial. The IPU
continues to monitor and observe his trial.
Mr Khader has consistently denied all charges against him and insists they have been fabricated in
an attempt to silence him for his political beliefs and his calls against corruption in the Palestinian
Authority. At his trial hearing in June 2005, Israeli Intelligence Officers admitted that evidence,
purported to incriminate him, had been fabricated. When questioned by Khader’s lawyer, an Israeli
Intelligence Officer also admitted that evidence from 2 prosecution witnesses had been fabricated.
The IPU has expressed its: ‘deep concern that the prosecution case essentially rests on the
statement of one person, who himself does not appear to be a credible witness”.
This comprehensive report - completed 2½ years after his arrest - covers all aspects of the case,
including the growing international campaign calling for Mr Khader's immediate release.
PHOTO: Hussam Khader at his court hearing, 15 March 2003 (© Itzik Ben Malki)
2
CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT
1. Mr Khader’s arrest, interrogation and detention 2
2. Khader denies all charges against him:
The Charges 4
Witnesses 4
Secret evidence 5
3. International Support for Hussam Khader: 6
The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) 6
The World Organisation Against Torture 8
Early Day Motion in the British House of Commons 8
Statements released by the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinian
Legislative Council and Fateh's leadership 8
World-wide petition calling for Hussam Khader’s immediate release 9
4. Denied access to medical care and access to his lawyers 10
5. Media blackout and coverage of Khader's case 11
6. Hunger strikes 12
7. Legal, Family and Other Visitors 12
8. Biography – Hussam Khader 14
9. Statements from prison 16
1. MR KHADER’S ARREST, INTERROGATION AND DETENTION
Hussam Khader was arrested on 17 March 2003 when approximately 50 soldiers barged into his
house in Balata Refugee Camp in Nablus during the night. The soldiers vandalized the house
entrance, smashed the door, and fired several shots in the house terrorising the other inhabitants,
including children. The soldiers also confiscated Mr Khader's personal property including his
computer, mobile phone and papers, including documents related to his parliamentary work. Mr
Khader was taken in his pyjamas from Nablus to Petah Tikva Investigation Centre in Israel where
he was held incommunicado for several days. His family and his lawyer did not know his
whereabouts.
In the period immediately following his arrest, Mr Khader was subjected to inhuman treatment. One
of his lawyers, Ra’ed Mahameed, was allowed to see him on 24 March 2003. At this meeting, Mr
Khader informed his lawyer that he was under investigation for more than 20 hours a day and that
he had been deprived of sleep and was given only 3 hours to rest and eat.
He was brought before a military judge on 26 March 2003 at Petah Tekva prison. Mr Khader's
lawyer, Riad Anes, was not allowed to see any material gathered against Mr Khader during the
investigation since it had been classified as secret evidence by the security forces. The Security
Forces asked for the renewal of his arrest for purposes of investigation. They claimed that he was
suspected of committing two crimes: (i) jeopardizing the region’s safety, and (ii) supporting military
activities against Israeli targets in the West Bank.
Mr Khader’s detention was renewed for an additional 15 days. Once again, after the hearing,
neither Mr Khader’s family nor his lawyers knew his whereabouts. After several days trying to
contact the Authorities, it was only after the defence lawyer threatened to file a petition with the
Courts that, on 4 April 2003, the authorities informed them that he had been transferred to Acre.
On 4 April - 2 weeks after his arrest - Riad Anes, Mr Khader's lawyer, was allowed to see him in
Acre Prison. According to Mr Anes, Mr Khader seemed very tired and he could not tell when
3
exactly he had been transferred to Acre. Mr Khader said that he was under intensive investigation
by various officers, and that he had been deprived of sleep and subjected to loud noises.
According to Mr Khader, he had been held in complete isolation, and during the hours of
investigation, he had been tied to a chair while shackled - a common method of torture known as
"shabeh". According to the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, this method of torture is
widely used by Israel (see: http://www.stoptorture.org.il/) despite Israel having ratified the United
Nations Convention against Torture in 1991. And despite torture being declared illegal by the
Israeli Supreme Court in 1999, Palestinian prisoners are routinely subjected to torture as a means
of interrogation.
For photos of ‘shabeh’ method of torture, see:
http://www.btselem.org/English/Photo_Archive/List.asp?x_Concatenate=20&z_Concatenate=LIKE,%27%25,
%25%27
In June 2005, over 2 years after his arrest, Mr Khader was allowed to address the Court for the
first time. He told the judge about the different methods of torture to which he had been subjected
during his 90-day interrogation. He said that a team of intelligence officers had interrogated him,
including subjecting him to torture. He was kept awake and denied sleep for days at a time, and
was often unaware whether it was day or night.
At one point he was held in Israel’s notorious secret prison, Facility 13912, where, he said, it was
dark all the time. On many occasions, he said, intelligence officers came into his cell while he was
sleeping; he was forced to stand up, face the wall and a bag was put over his head. His hands and
legs were tied and he was sometimes kept like this for up to 2 days at a time. He was given very
little food and water and therefore felt very weak. On many occasions he was not permitted to go
to the toilet. Mr Khader said the worst periods were when he was denied sleep for a period of 48
hours, and then for another period of 60 hours. Throughout these periods, his hands and feet were
tied while he was interrogated. He suffered severe back pain, which he continues to suffer from,
and for which, he continues to be denied proper medical treatment.
ACTION ALERT RELEASED BY THE WORLD ORGANISATION AGAINST TORTURE
Hussam Khader (Case ISR 190303)
In March 2003, the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) expressed their concern about
the use of inhuman methods of interrogation against Mr Khader (Case ISR 190303). Their appeal
expressed concern “for the physical and psychological integrity of Mr Khader, given the
excessive use of force during his arrest, and the fact that [Khader] was detained
incommunicado, with the heightened risk that he will be subjected to ill-treatment or torture
that this entails”.
The OMCT called on the Israeli authorities ‘to order [Khader's] immediate release, in the
absence of valid legal charges, to guarantee that he is provided with adequate reparation, and
to guarantee that the perpetrators of these acts are brought to justice’.
See:
http://www.omct.org/base.cfm?page=article&num=2993&consol=close&kwrd=OMCT&cfid=1287281&cftok
en=56738283
2 For further information on Facility 1391, see the Report by the International Commission of Jurists,
Swedish Section, Dec 04 (http://www.icjsweden.org/Facility%201391,second%20hearing.original.pdf)
4
2. MR KHADER DENIES ALL CHARGES AGAINST HIM
Despite over 3 months of intensive interrogation, including one period of interrogation non-stop for
60 hours after 3 months interrogation, and being held in solitary confinement, Mr Khader has
denied all the charges against him. Until his 15th court hearing on 29 June 2005, at all court
sessions, Mr Khader has only ever stated his name, title and affiliation with the Palestinian
Legislative Council. At his trial hearing on 29 June 2005, Mr Khader was allowed to address the
Court for the first time.
(i) The Charges
The charges against Mr Khader are:
• First charge: He is accused of performing services for an outlawed organization (Tanzim or
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades).
• Second charge: He is accused of giving NIS 4,000 to an individual, now the prosecution’s
key witness, in order to buy bullets and use them to attack Israeli soldiers. (The “plan” was
not executed).
• Third charge: He is accused of not preventing a crime and of knowing in advance about
certain attacks on Israeli targets in the West Bank and not informing the proper authorities
to prevent them.
Over the course of his initial interrogation, Mr Khader’s detention was persistently prolonged
without any charges being brought against him. In addition, all charges were kept secret from him
and his lawyer. The first two charges above were presented on 16 June 2003 – 3 months after his
arrest. This list was later amended and an additional particularly damaging charge - the third
charge above which allegedly connected Mr Khader to the failure to report acts of violence, as
attributed to the witness - was added.
As stipulated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by Israel in 1991:
"Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the reasons for his arrest
and shall be promptly informed of any charges against him".
Neither Mr Khader nor his lawyer was informed of the reasons for his arrest, nor the charges
against him, until 3 months after his arrest.
In the list of charges alleging Mr Khader’s prior knowledge of the planning to carry out a militant
act, the Israeli authorities have failed to provide any date that indicates Mr Khader’s knowledge of
the act prior to the date of its occurrence – it took place on 25 February 2003. If Mr Khader was
aware of such acts, which he was not, then the Israeli Authorities must provide a date to
substantiate its allegations against Mr Khader. They have not done so.
One of the charges relates to a trip Mr Khader made to Iran in 2001 as a member of an official
Parliamentary delegation to an international conference. Addressing the Court in June 2005, Mr
Khader said that he had been chosen by the Palestinian Legislative Council to represent them as a
member of the Palestinian delegation, as he had been chosen on other occasions to represent the
PLO and the PLC on visits to other countries.
Mr Khader said that accusations that he had been given a large amount of money in Iran were
untrue. He said a leaflet later published by political opponents accusing him of taking money from
Iran had been a cheap political move by individuals who were angry with him because of his
outspoken statements against corruption and the lack of democracy in the Palestinian Authority.
He named the individuals, members of the Palestinian Authority under former President Arafat. He
5
said they had authorised publication of these false accusations in a leaflet. Mr Khader said that
Israeli Intelligence had taken these false accusations being made by political opponents and were
now using them as charges against him, although there was no evidence to support the claims.
Prosecution witnesses have also admitted that they were asked to falsely incriminate Mr Khader by
former senior members of the Palestinian Authority – see below.
In order to pressurise Mr Khader and force him to confess to the charges, the Israeli Authorities
have continued to subject him to on-going physical, mental and physiological pressure, which has
including torture, throughout his 2½ year detention.
(ii) Witnesses
Mr Khader claims that all the charges against him are fabricated and were obtained from a single
state witness - Mr Ameer Sawallmeh - under duress and pressure. This witness was also being
tried and told the Court that he had not had any access to a lawyer for more than six weeks during
his own interrogation. The witness further testified that he had been shot in his foot during his
arrest. He said he was then taken by the army to a hospital for only 15 minutes, after which he was
immediately interrogated and pressured to implicate Mr Khader in his confession, although he had
never had any direct contact with him. This witness also claimed in Court that, as reported by the
IPU, “senior persons in the Palestinian Authority had asked him to incriminate Mr. Khader in the
event of his being detained”. Statements made by this witness, including those made at his own
trial, have been contradictory and inconsistent.3
Being from the same refugee camp and having been popularly known in the area, Mr. Khader had
limited knowledge of many people, including the witness, Ameer Sawallmeh. However, Mr
Khader’s acquaintance with the witness never materialized to any form of organizational or
operational connection. The Israeli Authorities’ case is thus to try to implicate Mr Khader through
an unfair process of guilt by association.
This witness was also subjected to significant pressure and torture that seem to have eventually
forced him to make these false allegations against Mr Khader. And given the circumstances
related to his own arrest and mistreatment, he is by no means a credible witness. This witness has
since been convicted and sentenced. Mr Khader insists that he had no connections, or any ties, to
any of the acts committed by the main prosecution witness.
Mr Khader’s lawyer has been denied the opportunity so far to question this witness about the
circumstances relating to his interrogation in order to establish whether his confession was
extracted under duress and coercion.
On one occasion, Mr Khader’s lawyer did try to question the prosecution's witness on his
confessions and allegations pertaining to Mr Khader, in particular, regarding the means and
methods used against him by the Israeli Authorities to obtain these confessions. The prosecution
objected to this line of questioning, and subsequently obtained the approval of the Court that the
witness should not reveal the methods used by the Authorities regarding the obtaining of
information from him.
The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, who are monitoring and observing Mr
Khader’s case, stated in their resolution in April 2005 their:
“deep concern that the prosecution case essentially rests on the statement of one
person, who himself does not appear to be a credible witness”.4
3 Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 176th session (Manila, 8th April 2005)
(CASE N° PAL/ 04 - HUSSAM KHADER). See: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/176/pal04.htm
4 ibid.
6
There are additional witnesses from the Israeli General Security Services, or witnesses that
corroborate the testimony of the single state witness, but provide no direct information on Mr
Khader. Although some of the other witnesses who were brought to the court confessed their
knowledge of Mr Sawallmeh’s involvement in attacks, none of them made any statement that
would implicate Mr Khader with any misconduct. At a trial hearing in June 2005, Israeli Intelligence
Officials admitted, under questioning from Mr Khader’s lawyer, that evidence from 2 of these
witnesses had been fabricated. Mr Sawallmeh’s confessions are, in this context, unsubstantiated
and lack all credibility.
(iii) Secret evidence
The prosecution is using secret evidence in Mr Khader’s case. One of the reasons Mr Khader's
trial was repeatedly postponed was to give time to the prosecution to have issued a certificate from
the IDF regional commander classifying the prosecution's material as secret evidence. This would
ensure it could not be presented to the court in front of Mr Khader and his defense team.
The Court has denied Mr Khader’s defense the opportunity to cross-examine the state’s witnesses
about secret evidence that “allegedly” implicates him in the specified activities, evidence that has
not been revealed in court hearings. The defense filed a motion to the appellate military court
asking for the disclosure of the secret evidence allegedly compiled against Mr. Khader, since such
material could be exculpatory. The appellate court rejected the motion.
Depriving Mr Khader’s lawyer from accessing this material hinders the judicial process of ensuring
Mr Khader a fair trail. By depriving him and his defense access to the evidence on which the case
is based, this renders the trial nominal and false, and falls far short of internationally accepted
standards for a fair trial.
During his interrogation, Mr. Khader was told that he had been put under surveillance and his
phone tapped, even though he was an elected member of the Palestinian Parliament, which per se
violates international law regulating diplomatic immunities.
Evidently, one can deduce that the Israeli judicial system conducts many of its interrogations using
methods that need to remain secret. This is because they involve methods that are contrary to
accepted and approved norms sanctioned by international law and conventions (to which Israel is
also signatory) concerning the proper and lawful treatment of political prisoners in an occupying
state’s prisons.
Mr Khader has always stated that he is an elected political leader who has views and opinions,
some of which may differ from those of many Israelis, and others, including some members of the
Palestinian Authority. He believes that he was arrested because of his political views and the
beliefs that he holds, and not because he participated in any alleged criminal or militant activities.
Addressing the Court in June 2005, Mr Khader said that he believes the case against him is an
attempt to silence him because of his political beliefs, his comments highlighting corruption and the
lack of democracy in the Palestinian Authority, his calls for respect for human rights and justice,
and his staunch support for a just solution to the issue of Palestinian refugees and their right of
return, as enshrined in UN Resolution 194.
Mr Khader is a popular leader, and it would seem that the Israeli Authorities are attempting to
silence a national popularly elected leader. This, in itself, is a violation of the individual and political
rights of Mr Khader.
7
3. INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR HUSSAM KHADER
(i) The Inter-Parliamentary Union
The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the Geneva-based international
organization of Parliaments of sovereign States representing 130 parliaments world-wide, including
the Israeli Knesset, has monitored Mr Khader's case for 2 years, given his status as an elected
member of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The IPU’s Governing Council and its Committee on
the Human Rights of Parliamentarians has issued 6 resolutions expressing consistent concerns
about Mr Khader's case, and the violations of international law that have occurred in his case.
The IPU has appointed a legal expert, Mr Simon Foreman, to observe Mr Khader’s trial. Mr
Foreman attended the trial hearing on 29 June 2005 and will attend the next trial hearing set for 4
September, after which he will issue his report.
IPU Resolutions have repeatedly called - most recently in April 2005 - for Mr Khader to be
transferred to the Palestinian Authorities with a view to his being prosecuted and judged by them,
in accordance with international law and international fair trial standards. They have also raised the
fact that Mr Khader’s lawyers were denied access to much of the investigation material supposedly
gathered against Mr Khader, which constitutes a grave violation of his right to a fair trial.5
IPU resolutions on Mr Khader’s case have repeatedly stated that the concerns put forward in its
expert report on PLC member Marwan Barghouti’s trial in 2004 with respect to transfer of
Palestinian citizens to Israeli territory, the conditions of detention and interrogation methods, and
the competence of Israeli Courts to judge Marwan Barghouti, "apply mutis mutandis in the case of
Hussam Khader".
Following Marwan Barghouti's trial, the IPU's Legal Expert concluded in his report that 'numerous
breaches of international law recalled in this report make it impossible to conclude that Mr.
Barghouti was given a fair trial'.6
As outlined in their resolutions, the IPU’s concerns include the following:
• The Oslo Accords transferred to Palestinian jurisdiction the authority to try Palestinians,
including with respect to attacks carried out against Israelis, and the Accords have been
embodied in Israeli law;7
• Mr. Khader should enjoy prisoner-of-war status pursuant to the Third Geneva Convention;
• The arrest of Mr. Khader was unlawful since he was abducted from his home in Nablus, a
Palestinian area, by the Israeli armed forces;
• The transfer of Mr. Khader from Nablus, territory under Palestinian sovereignty and
occupied by the Israeli army, to Israeli territory to be tried in Israel, is a grave breach of the
Fourth Geneva Convention.8 As the IPU Report on the Trial of Marwan Barghouti states: 'It
5 Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 176th session (Manila, 8th April 2005)
(CASE N° PAL/ 04 - HUSSAM KHADER). See: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/176/pal04.htm
6 See: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/174/report.htm
7 The Oslo Accords, including the Accord of 28 September 1995, are nevertheless still binding and in force
according to the Israeli Supreme Court, which applied it, for example, in the ruling of 3 September 2002
(case HCJ 7015/02 and 7019/02). See IPU Expert Report on the case of PLC Member Marwan Barghouti:
http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/174/report.htm)
8 The Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 is relative to the "protection of civilian persons in time of
war" and is applied notably to situations where a territory is occupied by the army of a Foreign State (Article
8
is very clearly stipulated that the Occupying Army is prohibited from transferring a prisoner
from the occupied territory to Israeli territory, "regardless of their motive"'.9
• The arrest and trial of Mr. Khader violates his parliamentary immunity deriving from his
status as a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council.
As relates to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by Israel in 1991:
• According to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: "Anyone who is
arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the reasons for his arrest and shall be
promptly informed of any charges against him". Neither Mr Khader nor his lawyer was
informed of the reasons for his arrest, nor the charges against him, until 3 months after his
arrest.
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that "Anyone arrested or
detained on a criminal charge shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer
authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable
time or to release". This article was breached in the case of Mr Khader whose detention
and trial hearings have gone on for 2½ years to date.
A request from the IPU in November 2004 for a delegation to visit Mr Khader, to enable them to
clarify issues related to Mr Khader’s situation, was denied by the Israeli Authorities. At its meeting
in January 2005, however, the IPU's Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians decided
to send a legal observer to Mr Khader's trial and continue to monitor all aspects of the case. They
are also enquiring into the possibility of one or two members of the Committee on the Human
Rights of Parliamentarians traveling to Israel to visit Mr Khader and relevant authorities.
The IPU resolutions are:
- Resolution adopted unanimously by the Governing Council at its 173rd session (Geneva, 3 October
2003) (see: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/173/pal04.htm)
- Resolution adopted unanimously by the Governing Council at its 174rd session (Mexico, 23 April
2004) (see: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/174/pal04.htm)
- Decision adopted by the IPU Human Rights Committee at its 106th session (Geneva, 28 June to 1st
July, 2004)
- Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 175th session (Geneva, 1
October 2004) (see: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/175/pal04.htm)
- Decision adopted by the IPU Human Rights Committee at its 108th session (Geneva, 24-27 January
2005)
- Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 176th session (Manila, 8 April
2005 (see: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/176/pal04.htm)
(ii) The World Organisation Against Torture
As noted above, the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) expressed concern about the
use of inhuman methods of interrogation against Mr Khader (Case ISR 190303). In March 2003,
their appeal expressed concern “for the physical and psychological integrity of Mr Khader, given
the excessive use of force during his arrest, and the fact that [Khader] was detained
incommunicado, with the heightened risk that he will be subjected to ill-treatment or torture that this
entails”.
The OMCT called on the Israeli authorities ‘to order [Khader's] immediate release, in the absence
2). Israel acceded to the Convention on 6 January 1952.
9 See IPU Expert Report on the case of PLC Member Marwan Barghouti – see footnote 7.
9
of valid legal charges, to guarantee that he is provided with adequate reparation, and to guarantee
that the perpetrators of these acts are brought to justice’.
See:
http://www.omct.org/base.cfm?page=article&num=2993&consol=close&kwrd=OMCT&cfid=1287281&cftoken
=56738283
(iii) Early Day Motion (EDM) in the British House of Commons
In December 2004, over 100 British Members of Parliament signed an Early Day Motion tabled in
the British Parliament expressing concern about the situation of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli
jails, and in particular, the cases of Hussam Khader and Marwan Barghouti.
The motion called on the British 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".
See: http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=249&SESSION=873
(iv) Statements released by the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinian Legislative Council
and Fateh's leadership
The Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Legislative Council,
the Palestinian Minister of Prisoners Affairs, and Fateh’s leadership have all issued statements
condemning the continued detention of the Palestinian Parliamentarians Hussam Khader and
Marwan Barghouti, and have called for their immediate release.
In his inaugural speech to the PLC on 29 April 2003, Palestinian Prime Minster Mahmoud Abbas
stated his government’s commitment to work for the release of Palestinian political prisoners,
particularly senior political leaders, including Hussam Khader and Marwan Barghouti.
In August 2003, Mr Khader was adopted as ‘Prisoner of the Month’ by the Mandela Institute for
Human Rights in Palestine.
(v) World-wide petition and statements calling for Hussam Khader’s immediate release – 44
Parliamentarians from around the world have called for Mr Khader’s release
In April 2005, a world-wide petition calling for the immediate release of Hussam Khader and
demanding that Israel respect international law and adhere to internationally-accepted legal
standards to ensure a fair trial, both for Hussam Khader, and for all Palestinian political prisoners,
was launched.
To date, the PETITION has been signed by over 600 people, including:
Luisa Morgantini (Member of European Parliament)
Caroline Lucas (Member of European Parliament)
Brian Iddon (Member of Parliament, UK)
Richard Burden (Member of Parliament, UK)
Michael Connarty (Member of Parliament, UK)
Anne Campbell (former Member of Parliament, UK)
Professor Noam Chomsky (USA)
Professor Naseer Aruri (USA)
Dr Elaine Hagopian (USA)
Dr Uri Davis (Palestine/Israel)
10
Frances Webber (UK Barrister)
Henry Blaxland QC (UK Barrister)
Dr Rosemary Sayyigh (Lebanon)
Professor Paul Kessler (France)
ADDAMEER Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association (Palestine)
New England Committee to Defend Palestine (USA)
To sign the petition, please see: http://www.petitiononline.com/hussam22/
In addition, a STATEMENT calling for the immediate release of HUSSAM KHADER and
expressing concern about the legal proceedings in his case, has been signed by 23 members of
the Palestinian Legislative Council and 8 members of the Israeli Knesset:
8 Members of the Knesset:
Mohamad Baraka MK
Esam Makhul MK
Abed El-Malek Dahamseh MK
Azmi Bishara MK
Jamal Zahalka MK
Ahmad Al-Tibi MK
Talab El-Sanea MK
Wasel Taha MK
23 Members of the Palestinian Legislative Council:
Rouhee Fatouh, President of the PLC Hassan Khereisha, Deputy President PLC
Kadoora Fares Ahmad Al-Deek
Moufeed Abed Raboo Othman Gashash
Azmi Shuaybe Salah El-Taamari
Jamal El-Shoubaki Moawya El-Masri
Abbas Zaki Dalal Salameh
Fakhree Al-Turokman Hattem Abed El-Qader
Rashad El-Kasser Abed El-Jawad Saleh
Ahmad Hashem Azgayar Hakam Balawi
Mahmoud Daas Souliman Abu Sneneh
Daoud Al-Zeer Emad El-Falogi
Emeel Gargoee
(Full copy of the STATEMENT - see http://www.hussamkhader.org/english/internal_eng/recentdev.html).
An additional APPEAL STATEMENT issued by Dialogue Magazine has been signed by 8
Members of Parliament from around the world:
Louiza Hannoun, Labour Party MP, Algeria
Alexandre Anor, Socialist Party MP, Geneva Switzerland.
Ivan Valente, Federal MP of the Labour Party, Brazil.
Chico Alencar, Federal MP of the Labour Party, Brazil.
Flavio Koutzii, State MP of the Labour Party, Brazil.
Renato Simões, State MP of the Labour Party, Brazil
Renato Magtubo, Labour Party MP, the Philippines.
Derek Wyatt, Labour Party MP Great Britain
(Full copy of the APPEAL – see http://www.hussamkhader.org/english/internal_eng/khader_appeal_fin.pdf).
11
4. DENIED ACCESS TO MEDICAL CARE AND TO HIS LAWYERS
During the weeks and months of interrogation and detention, Hussam Khader was repeatedly
denied access to medical treatment. Although Mr Khader was suffering from severe spinal pain,
the prison authorities refused to provide him with medical care. In addition, he was repeatedly
denied access to his lawyers - in violation of international law and various international covenants
to which Israel is a signatory.
Following his arrest in March 2003 – outlined above – at a hearing on 8 April 2003 at which his
detention was renewed for a further 17 days, Mr Khader's lawyer asked the judge to allow a
medical examination of Mr Khader as his health was deteriorating due to the severe methods of
investigation being used against him. This was denied. At the hearing, Mr Khader had informed his
lawyer that he was still suffering from sleep deprivation and extremely long hours of investigation.
What amounted to severe emotional and psychological pressure included long periods in solitary
confinement, exposure to extremely loud noises, and lengthy interrogations. Mr Anes also stated
that Mr Khader was being transferred from one detention facility to another and, as a result, looked
completely exhausted during the hearing.
At the same hearing on 8 April 2003, the General Security Services issued an order prohibiting Mr
Khader’s lawyer, Riad Anes, from meeting his client for 5 days starting from 8 April 2003.
According to Mr Anes, the prohibition on visiting Mr Khader was used to pressurise his client and
to intimidate him during his interrogation. On 14 April the ban on visiting Mr Khader was extended
to 18 April without any explanation. Again on 21 April, Mr Khader’s arrest was extended for the
third time by the Military Court at Jalameh Prison, despite the deterioration of Mr Khader's health.
At the hearing, his lawyer demanded his immediate release, arguing that the alleged charges
against Mr Khader were groundless.
Finally on 25 April 2003 - six weeks after his arrest - the ban on visiting Mr Khader was terminated
and he was able to meet with his lawyer face-to-face. Again he informed his lawyer about his
deteriorating health, the terrible conditions he was being kept in, and the continuing daily
interrogations to which he was being subjected by the security services in order to extract a
confession from him. According to lawyer Riad Anes, it was clear that Mr Khader was physically
weak. Only his lawyer was allowed to see him; no members of his family had been able to see him
since his arrest.
Mr Khader's detention was renewed a further 3 times between May and June 2003. Despite
pressure and legal challenges made by Mr Khader’s lawyer, as well as efforts made by human
rights and prisoners' campaign groups, and regardless of the fact that Mr Khader continued to
suffer from serious medical problems, the Israeli Authorities continued to prevent International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) representatives from visiting or assisting Mr Khader with any
medical help.
On 21 May 2003, after his detention had been extended for the 5th time, and before being
transferred back to Petah Tikva from Acre Prison, Mr Khader was held for a week in absolute
isolation in his cell. He was not allowed to see anyone, not even the prison guards. After this week
of absolute isolation, he was questioned for 60 hours (2 ½ days) without a break. During the
investigation, he was not allowed to sleep or eat. And again, on 4 June 2003, his detention was
extended for the sixth time.
Throughout his pre-trial detention, Mr Khader’s legal team has denied access to him on at least 8
occasions. On one occassion, Mr Khader’s lawyer sent a preliminary petition to the Ministry of
Justice demanding it lift the prohibition on him meeting his client.
12
5. MEDIA BLACKOUT AND COVERAGE OF MR KHADER’S CASE
In December 2003, the Israeli authorities imposed a media blackout on coverage of Mr Khader’s
court hearings and trial. Mr Khader's defence attorney, Riad Anis, petitioned the military court to
allow reporters into the courtroom. Reporters were subsequently allowed to attend the hearings
and reports of the case have appeared in the Palestinian, Israeli and International press.
Since the lifting of the media blackout, a number of articles in the Israeli daily, Ha’aretz, have
covered Mr Khader's case: one referred to the suggestion of a dispute between different branches
of the Israeli military as to whether Mr Khader should be released, and another referred to the fact
that he was one of the prisoners slated for release in December 2004.
• An article by H’aaretz correspondent, Amos Harel on 17 June 2003 claimed that: "Central
Command Major General Moshe Kaplinski recently recommended that Khader be released
as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians but the Shin Bet overruled the recommendation".10
• And again on 6 December 2004, Ha’aretz correspondent, Amos Harel again reported that
"Prisoners whose release was imminent were put on the list, with a preference for those
belonging to the political leadership of Palestinian organizations ... One of the candidates
for release is Husam Khader, Palestinian parliament member and Nablus Fatah leader.
Khader, from the Balata refugee camp, was arrested some two years ago and is facing trial
for transferring funds to Fatah's military wing".11
A third article by Danny Rubinstein in Ha’aretz (21 March 2004) gives an account of the
prosecution witness' unreliable and contradictory testimony to the Court.12
Human Rights Groups challenge the Israeli Authorities on
limiting lawyers' access to their imprisoned clients
On 9 August 2004, Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, submitted a
preliminary petition to the Office of the State Attorney demanding the immediate repeal of an
illegal policy which denies or limits attorneys' access to their imprisoned clients, a policy which
is often applied in the Hadarim (where Hussam Khader is detained) and Nafha prisons.
On August 12 2004, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel sent a similar letter to the Legal
Council of the Israeli Prison Service demanding to end all illegal limitations imposed on
Palestinian political prisoners who seek to exercise their basic right to access legal council on a
regular basis.
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. The Court stated that cases of the IPS barring such
meetings during the recent hunger strike undertaken by Palestinian political prisoners and
detainees were illegal, at the admission of the state’s own representative.
For an update, see: http://www.adalah.org/eng/legaladvocacyprisoners.php#7867
10 Army to prosecute PLC member, Amos Harel, Ha’aretz, June 17, 2003
11 Israel to free Palestinian prisoners as gesture to Egypt, Amos Harel, Ha’aretz, 6 December 2004
12 While Barghouti makes headlines, Husam Khader is hardly mentioned, Danny Rubinstein, Ha’aretz, 21
March 2004
13
6. HUNGER STRIKES
In March 2004, Mr Khader went on hunger strike for 9 days in protest at his continued solitary
confinement for over a year in the ‘Ishel’ section of Beer Saba prison. He ended his hunger strike
on 25 March 2004 after he was moved to a cell with another prisoner.
And, again in August 2004, over 4,000 Palestinian political prisoners, including PLC members,
Hussam Khader and Marwan Barghouti, went on hunger strike to demand that their rights under
international law, and as prisoners of war, be respected, and for an end to torture and inhuman
and illegal detention conditions. The strike ended 19 days later after negotiations with the Israeli
Prison Service.
7. LEGAL, FAMILY AND OTHER VISITORS
Throughout his detention, Mr Khader has not had full access to his legal team, or had adequate
opportunity and facilities to prepare his defense. So much so that in April 2005, the IPU Governing
Council noted:
“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 [Israeli] Supreme Court of 1
September 2004 on the right of detainees and prisoners to meet their lawyers.13
Eminent Palestinian politicians, including Dr. Jamal Zahalka, Mohammed Barakeh, and Dr. Azmi
Bishara, all members of the Israeli Knesset, have attended Mr Khader’s trial hearings. The
Knesset member, Dr Ahmed Tibi was allowed to visit Mr Khader in December 2004. Other than
them, no one other than his lawyers was allowed to visit Khader for the first 21 months of his
detention. Following Mr Khader's court hearing in November 2004, which he attended, Knesset
member, Jamal Zahalka, accused the Israeli Authorities of fabricating evidence against Mr Khader.
Mr Khader, like all other prisoners from Nablus and other ‘security’ prisoners, was denied all family
visits during the first 21 months of his detention. Only in December 2004 - 21 months after his
arrest - were his three young children finally allowed to visit their father. No other members of his
family were allowed to visit him. It was only in April 2005 was his 67 year-old mother given
permission to visit him. She had been denied permission to visit her son on 'security' grounds for
over 2 years.
On a number of occassions, Advocate Buthayna Duqmaq from the Mandela Human Rights
Organisation was allowed to visit Mr Khader. In August 2004, Ms Duqmaq visited Mr Khader and
other prisoners in Hadarim Prison. She reported on the poor prison conditions that prisoners
endure on a daily basis. The prisoners suffer from constant humiliation and pressure depriving
them of their basic human rights, and are denied all contact with their families. At Hadarim, the
Palestinian prisoners have no, or very limited access to, medical treatment, and are given very
poor quality food. They were all subjected to inhuman treatment. To protest against their conditions
and treatment, the prisoners in Hadarim prison, including Mr Khader, went on hunger strike on 15
August 2004, which ended 19 days later after negotiations with the Israeli Prison Service. Ms
Duqmaq visited Mr Khader and other prisoners in July 2005, again reporting the inhuman
conditions in which the prisoners are kept. Knesset member Wasel Taha visited him in July 2005.
The IPU's Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians adopted a resolution at its meeting
in January 2005 in Geneva requesting "the [IPU] Secretary General to enquire about the possibility
13 Resolution adopted unanimously by the IPU Governing Council at its 176th session (Manila, 8th April 2005)
(CASE N° PAL/ 04 - HUSSAM KHADER). See: http://www.ipu.org/english/issues/hrdocs/176/pal04.htm
14
of a Committee member or two travelling to Israel to meet Mr Khader and the competent
authorities, as the parliamentary authorities see fit". This visit was denied by the Israeli Authorities.
Petition to the Israeli Supreme Court to allow children of 'security' prisoners to have
physical contact during their visit
On 16 August 2004, Adalah in Israel submitted a petition to the Supreme Court demanding that
the Court issue an injunction requiring the Israel Prison Authority (IPA) to allow the children of
prisoners classified by the IPA as ‘security’ prisoners to have physical contact with their parents
during prison visits. The right of “security” prisoners to receive family visits is particularly
important given that ‘security’ prisoners’ are completely prohibited from using telephones,
unlike other prisoners who are allowed to use the telephone daily. Consequently, visits are the
only means by which the children of ‘security’ prisoners can see and speak to their incarcerated
parent.
The petition was submitted on behalf of ten children of ‘security’ prisoners, the Prisoners
Association and in Adalah’s own name, against the IPA. It should be noted that an earlier
petition submitted by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel to Haifa District Court on behalf
of Sheikh Ra’ed Salah demanding the court to order the IPA to allow physical contact between
Sheikh Salah and his baby who was born after his arrest was rejected.
For an update on this legal challenge, see:
http://www.adalah.org/eng/legaladvocacyprisoners.php#7867
HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANISATIONS CRITICISE ISRAEL’S ILLEGAL
TREATMENT OF PALESTINIAN PRISONERS
According to human rights groups, Israel has systematically tortured or ill-treated approximately
80% of all Palestinian detainees. As of 2005, there were over 8,000 Arab and Palestinian political
prisoners detained in Israeli prisons and military detention facilities. Amnesty International,
among other human rights groups, has long reported a history of violent abuse towards
Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. The detainees, many of whom are being held without
charge, are subjected to harsh treatment including torture and other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment, inadequate health care and access to medical facilities, inadequate and
nutritionally deficient supplies of food, and prohibitions on family visits.
Reports by Palestinian, Israeli and International human rights organisations have criticised the
conditions of detention, torture and inhuman treatment to which Palestinian prisoners are
subjected on a regular basis.
Under the Fourth Geneva Convention political prisoners detained by an occupying power are
guaranteed basic standards of treatment. Palestinian and Arab prisoners are not being afforded
these rights. In addition, Israel is violating the UN Basic Minimum Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners. And under Common Article 1 of the Geneva Convention, others countries – as the High
Contracting Parties to the Convention - have an obligation to “ensure respect” for its provisions.
For further information on Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails, see:
- ADAMEER - http://www.addameer.org/
- Mandela Institute for Human Rights - http://www.mandela-palestine.org/
- Public Committee Against Torture in Israel - http://www.stoptorture.org.il/
- Adalah Legal Centre for Arab Minority Rights in Israel – http://www.adalah.org/
15
8. BIOGRAPHY: HUSSAM KHADER
Hussam Khader was born on 8 December 1961 in the Palestinian
village Kufr Rumman. He graduated from An-Najah University in
Nablus in Business Management and Political Sciences. Before
the start of the first intifada in 1988, he had been arrested 23 times
by the Israeli occupation forces, as well as detained for 1½ years
and placed under house arrest for one year.
At the beginning of the first Intifada, Mr Khader was one of the
founders of several youth organisations, including in Balata
Refugee Camp, that were to play a crucial role in the popular
uprising against the Israeli occupation. He was also active in the
Student Council of An-Najah University. On 13 January 1988, Mr
Khader was the first Intifada activist to be deported from Palestine. After being wounded in a
demonstration he was deported to South Lebanon by the Israeli occupation forces.
After being exiled, Mr Khader, the father of 3 children, played an ever more important role in
politics. He represented the PLO on many occasions and, as an ambassador of the Intifada, met
several Presidents and addressed various Parliaments in different countries. He also became a
member of the Palestinian National Council (PNC).
After being allowed to return to Palestine on 5 April 1994 after the signing of the Oslo Agreement,
Hussam Khader co-founded the Supreme Council for Co-ordination of Fateh Activities together
with Faisal Husseini and Marwan Barghouthi. He also became Chairman in the Ministry of Youth
and Sport and gave several speeches at the Palestinian Centre for Democracy and Elections.
A refugee himself, Mr Khader is an outspoken advocate for refugee rights and a staunch defender
of the right to return for refugees, and a just solution to the refugee issue. He founded the
Committee for the Defence of the Rights of Palestinian Refugees, which insists that a just solution
to the right of return for Palestinian refugees must be included in any peace treaty between Israel
and the Palestinians.
"We have succeeded in convincing much of the world that the right of return is at the
heart of the Palestinian issue and that without granting the refugees that right there can
be no enduring peace in the region … we can’t allow ethnic cleansing to triumph. We will
assert this position day and night. We will not allow ourselves to rest because the right of
return is a matter of life or death for the refugees and the Palestinian national cause as a
whole. The refugees’ cause is the Palestinian cause." (Hussam Khader, quoted in 'No
waiving the right of return', Khaled Amayreh, Al-Ahram Weekly, 2 October 2002)14
In 1996, Mr Khader was elected to the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC, the Palestinian
Parliament), as a representative from the Nablus district. He is also a member of the Palestinian
Legislative Council’s Monitoring and Political Committees.
He has long been known as a fierce defender of the separation of powers, basic rights concerning
freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and the struggle against corruption and for financial
accountability and transparency in the Palestinian Authority and the PLO. He has also called for
the strengthening of NGOs and other civilian institutions, and was an independent member of the
Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group’s Board of Trustees.
14 Posted at: http://www.jerusalemiloveyou.net/article.php3?id_article=33
16
Mr Khader established a reputation for challenging former Palestinian President, Yasser Arafat, for
not being actively engaged in putting an end to corruption that, among other things, he believed,
hindered Palestinians’ efforts to establish accountable and democratic institutions in the
Palestinian territories.
In an interview with Graham Usher, published in Al-Ahram Weekly (30 January 2001), Mr Khader
explained that:
"Unless this [second] intifada achieves internal reform of Palestinian society it cannot be
deemed a success. The [Al-Aqsa] Intifada showed the Palestinians have not surrendered --
that they are still prepared to fight for their rights. But we should also be fighting for
democracy, the rule of law, proper and accountable institutions and human dignity. Without
these, I'm afraid this intifada could end up the same way as the last one, not with victory but
with Oslo."15
Mr Khader has always maintained a strong connection with the masses and the people he
represents. He has always upheld his absolute commitment to the Palestinians' right to struggle
against Israel’s brutal occupation, and to the achievement of Palestinians’ ultimate national goal of
establishing an independent state located alongside the state of Israel:
‘There is no life without dignity, freedom and without our state’
(Hussam Khader, interviewed in Jerusalem Post Internet edition, 2 March 2002)
In an interview with Deborah Sontag for the New York Times Magazine (3 February 2003), Mr
Khader reaffirmed his support for the peace process and a peaceful and just settlement with Israel:
''I went to the Knesset, and they introduced me as a man of peace,'' he said. ''I went to Neve
Shalom and preached coexistence. I went to Cairo and preached normalization. But now I am
just another number in the Israelis' computer. There is nothing in my file that says, 'He was a
peace partner.' Now I am another Palestinian face into which the soldiers can shine their
flashlights.''
(see: 'The Palestinian Conversation', Deborah Sontag, New York Times Magazine, 3 February 2003).
Mr Khader has expressed his belief that Palestinians need to pursue peaceful methods when
dealing with each other and should never resort to the use of violence or take the law into their
own hands when dealing with corrupt leaders and/or confronting alleged collaborators. He believes
that the Palestinians’ ability to confront Sharon’s policies, and Israel’s occupation in general, can
only be maintained and achieved, through unity, accountability and transparency. To this end, he
believes that the relationship between the Palestinian people and their leadership needs to be
strengthened through a commitment to the development of democratic and accountable
institutions.
9. STATEMENTS FROM PRISON
• In March 2005, in a message sent from his prison cell, Mr Khader called on the Palestinian
Authority and its leadership to exert more pressure on the Israel to release all Palestinian
political prisoners. He outlined how the prisoners had played a constructive role in ensuring
the current ceasefire between the parties, and that, without the prisoners' release, the current
hudna (ceasefire) could not possibly be sustained. Mr Khader reiterated his commitment to a
just and peaceful solution to the conflict with Israel. He called on Palestinians to maintain their
15 The enemy within, Graham Usher, Al Ahram Weekly 30 January 2001. See http://www.acj.org/Jan_30.htm
17
