Who will investigate the investigators: This is how complaints of torture in the GSS are investigated

Complaints that are examined after years, researchers who lose memory and questioning conducted at the mall: Evidence and documents reveal how the Bataan works - the only one that checks complaints against GSS investigators. Over the years, about a thousand files have been closed. Committee Against Torture: "Data Should Shame". Matan: "The activity was approved in the High Court"

Who will investigate the investigators: This is how complaints of torture in the GSS are investigated

(In the video: ISA chief Nadav Argaman on data on terrorist attacks in the past year)

On September 11, 2017, two people met at a mall in the center of the country. This outside observer could have seen a calm and routine conversation over a cup of coffee. However, in practice, this was an official "questioning" of the Bataan - the only one in the Justice Ministry responsible for investigating complaints of GSS investigators on torture. Although the unit's inquiries are usually conducted at GSS facilities, the leisurely conversation at the mall is another example of the unit's activity, which, during its operations, has closed more than a thousand cases for investigators' complaints, and only in one case found it appropriate to open a criminal investigation.

The two men who took part in the mall question are L., one of the members of Bataan, and "Leon" - a Shin Bet investigator. The subject: An investigation that took place almost three years before, in which allegations of torture were raised. The suspect, N.Y., a 22-year-old South West resident, was investigated for about 50 days while sleeping deprivation. For the most part, five weeks, he avoided meeting his lawyer.

According to N., on several occasions, one of the investigators grabbed his throat, tilting his head back, ostensibly to see something written on a board in the interrogation room, but in fact strangled him. Then, he said, the interrogator shook him sideways for a few minutes, with only the handcuffs preventing him from falling off the chair. In other cases, he claimed, the investigators threatened to spread rumors to his sister that they would get her a bad name.

This is a serious complaint, as "shaking" and sleep deprivation are explicitly prohibited by the High Court. But in the interrogation, "Leon" did not remember the investigation or questioned at all. To refresh his memory, L. allowed him to read the memory of things (Zak " D) who wrote after the part of the investigation in which he was present. This is only a fraction of all the days of investigation, and in any case the acts attributed to Leon were relatively minor. Thus, though he did not remember the specific inquiry, he could say that he would never resort to violence against an interrogator.

Read more on the subject

Investigators forgot what happened behind closed doors. Interrogation room (Photo: Omar Miron)

Police station interrogation room, December 2011 (Photo: Omar Miron)

Altogether, the MTB members will ask seven investigators who participated in the same investigation. Five claimed they did not remember the interrogation or the interrogator, and yet denied his claims. The interrogator also "tried", which according to the allegations was that he actually stole N. The investigators who immediately remembered the interrogator were those described as responsible for the interrogation - "Daddy" and "Berman." According to the complaint, "Daddy" was present for some of the time when the shaking took place. .

"Berman" also remembered an investigation that was conducted without unusual events, as he defined it, except that he was not present at the time of the shaking, so to speak. Regarding the allegations that the investigators insulted or cursed the interrogator's family members, or threatened to disseminate pictures of his sister, he replied that he did not do such a thing, and do not remember that another investigator did such a thing in his presence. He further claimed that insulting an interrogated family member was not something that would be done.

Questionnaires were extremely short - two to three pages each. It is evident that the members of the Bataan did not try to surprise the GSS interrogators, confront them, or even conduct any sophistication with the little evidence in their hands. Five investigators who did not remember, and two who denied the allegations about the parts in which they attended - had sued the Mataban to close the case.

The court ruled: GSS investigators violated basic rights of hate crime suspects

Info from Bataan (Photo: Image processing)

"What do you mean don't remember," he told Walla! NEWS factor that is well acquainted with ISA investigations. "It makes no sense. It does not align with common sense. Researchers remember their interrogators well. The interrogator sits there for weeks, doing exercises for him, and planning the interrogation - there is no such thing in the world that does not even remember the interrogation and interrogation. It does not exist in reality. There is no such thing. The one they don't remember shows about corporate rendering behavior. "

"I am not against the Shin Bet," says the interlocutor in the interrogations. "But they do not understand that the prices of what they do are not just against the interrogators. When you work illegally, then tomorrow you and you will find ourselves in the investigation, and the investigator will say he can't remember what he was. Vitrado has been sexually assaulted and investigators can't remember. This is our face as a country. I am assuming that in 95% these are false complaints that try to interfere with GSS work, with false claims. So for the 5%, or 2%, or one percent that has faults, you have to build a procedure that is entirely rendering? There are faults. And if that is how the procedure looks, what will prevent the system from whitewashing the cases where an error has occurred and deviated from the procedures? "

Matbani said in the investigation that "some of the investigators did not accurately remember the interrogator and / or the investigation, but they still addressed the complainant's claims and answered the questions of the MBA investigators."

The decision is always to close the case

The UAV was established in 1992 by a government decision. For about 20 years, GSS members headed it, but in 2014 it was decided to transfer the unit to the Ministry of Justice. Matan is investigating the complaints and submits his findings to a senior Justice Ministry lawyer who decides what to do with the complaint. In one case, as mentioned, the decision is always to close the case. Served in the ISA. The Justice Department's newly appointed attorney is Adv. Shlomi Abramzon, from the Department of Special Offices.

The use of physical investigative means was "settled" in a series of high court rulings and under the guidance of Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein from 1999. The High Court decided to discuss the matter only after a detainee named Abd a-Samad Harizat died following long-standing ISA interrogation "Shaking."

The established rule is that investigators must not use physical means during interrogation, and these constitute a criminal offense. However, the law recognizes a "need" defense, whereby a person will not be criminally prosecuted for an act that was immediately necessary to prevent serious injury to another person. Regarding Shin Bet investigations, it was determined that if a researcher found physical means to obtain information that would prevent serious harm to state security, and that there was no other way to obtain the information, he would not be prosecuted. The usual example is a "ticking bomb" - a situation where information must be investigated. About a terrorist act that is scheduled to take place in the near future.

For about 20 years, the MBA was headed by GSS members. Ministry of Justice (Photo: Reuven Castro)

Ministry of Justice (Photo: Reuven Castro)

The main problem facing a researcher who claims that GSS investigators tortured him is obtaining evidence. Contrary to police investigations, the law states that there is no obligation to document GSS investigations on video. Therefore, the only documentation, in most cases, is the memos that the service investigators write themselves during the investigation. These are documents that provide a very partial record of the investigation - they summarize in Hebrew the interrogator's words, which were most often said in Arabic, and hardly refer to the atmosphere or events that happened in the room. " Very concise dim, so long-hour investigations are documented over several pages.

Beyond that, examining the zebras gives the feeling that interrogation is at least as leisurely as the interrogation of the "Leon" researcher at the mall. Thus, ZAK's investigation of the investigation notes that "Landon was served dinner in the interrogation room, her daughter's weight and cookies, between 10 p.m. : 35 to 22:45 Stay in his cell. " Another questionnaire stated that the researcher "was asked about his health, replied that he felt good." Even when the researchers bother to mention a confrontation note in the interrogation room, the researcher's statements are documented, while the description of the researchers' behavior usually suffices with the phrase "answered in his language". "The person in question at this point raised his voice and said that he was not lying and that we were zeroing and interested in his eggs and that, as far as he was concerned, the investigation was over. He was answering in his language and raising his voice," the memo says in recent years.

In general, the researchers are careful to note in the questionnaires whether the researcher is given refreshments or food as well as the fact that the researcher is welcomed at the beginning and end of the case. The researcher was unable to explain what is behind the ISA's procedure that requires registering refreshments that are being investigated in food, cigarette, or coffee, as well as recording a short break, but does not require registering an event such as sound lifting, and even if The interrogator was handcuffed, "wrote Judge Alon Inffeld, adding:" I remarked to the investigator that this sounded like one-sided writing. Rest your ear on the possibility that the researcher felt comfortable, but no other things are recorded, which will point in a different direction, unless they are particularly unusual. No reasonable response was received. "

Examining the ZDCs gives the feeling that interrogation is a relaxing event.

Investigative materials (Photo: official website)

"Cooper" also took part in the investigation of S., who was arrested in June 2014, while searching for the three boys - Naftali Frankel, Gil-Ad Gate and Eyal Yefarah. For more than a month, he avoided meeting a lawyer. In one of the remand hearings against him, GSS officials argued in the Ofer Camp Military Court that he confessed to some of the suspicions against him. Nevertheless, at the end of his investigation, he was sent for six months in administrative detention, and then released without being indicted.

In a complaint filed in December that year, he described violent arrest and investigation. Among other things, he said, investigators threatened to arrest and beat his family members and complained about lengthy investigations with his hands cuffed in the back, strangulation and sleep deprivation. According to him, when he fell asleep, the investigators would beat him to wake him up. Only two and a half years after the complaint was filed, in May 2017, his testimony was taken.

Although no less than 22 researchers participated in the Q investigation, only five of them were questioned, although not necessarily the most dominant researchers or those present during most of the investigation. The questionnaires were conducted for about eight months, each lasting a maximum of about one hour, spanning two to three pages. All five investigators used the males to recall the investigation, and dismissed Q's claims against them for taking violence and threats on their part or others.

Torture in GSS interrogation is a criminal offense for everything, except that BATAN investigators are not authorized to conduct a criminal investigation - only a disciplinary investigation. Because of this, at the beginning of the questioning, the members of the Bataan warn Shin Bet investigators that whatever they say about the questioning may be used against them in an internal disciplinary process, but not in a criminal procedure. This is in violation of the logic of criminal investigation. Usually in the first phase of the criminal investigation, the investigators will generally ask the investigator for his version of events. Then, gradually, the evidence in their hands will be dropped. The most important evidence is that which contradicts details in the version provided by the interrogator. Inquiries from the Bataan create the opposite situation: even in the unlikely event that a criminal investigation will be opened, the investigated investigators will come to her after they have already been exposed to the allegations against them, and also looked at the most important evidence - the males.

"No violence support found"

S.'s claims that he was prevented from sleeping at a level that is a real torture were met by another wall: the secret GSS procedures. In one case, S. was interrogated for more than 28 hours, during which he was given two breaks, one and a half and two hours - a time clearly not Enough for sleep and recovery. Nevertheless, in Matan's decision to close the case, it was noted that "these investigations were conducted in accordance with the relevant Shin Bet procedures and the complainant received rest as required (although he was tired). The procedures are, of course, confidential and not disclosed to the complainant.

That undocumented ISA investigations create an almost impassable barrier for interrogators who want to prove their claims. Nevertheless, Q was able to bring evidence to support his statements. According to his complaint, in part of the investigation, Q was seated in a chair with a backrest, He said he felt his back was about to break, and one of the investigators threatened him to stay that way for a whole month until he was disabled, and he also complained about a long-standing handcuff during the interrogations.

After his release, Q underwent medical examinations by two doctors (one a psychiatrist) trained under the Istanbul Protocol - which is an international standard for identifying and documenting torture victims. The protocol was recognized by the United Nations, and in some circumstances also by the State of Israel. The two doctors who examined S. found that his medical and mental condition was most appropriate for his claims regarding the investigation. They also addressed specific points, such as sensitivity to the spine, and nerve damage Palms.

At Matan, and not for the first time, they did not give any real weight to the medical opinion because they claimed it was "largely based" on Q's claims. In practice, doctors also examined Q's medical file transferred to them by IPS, and indeed in accordance with accepted standards During such tests he also conducted an interview of about ten hours during which he heard his descriptions and performed various tests for him. Such medical opinions are presented daily in courts in Israel and around the world and serve as judges in various fields. But for Matan it was not enough to order the opening of a real investigation. Matan refused to answer Walla questions! NEWS regarding Q's investigation, because the appeal he filed to close the case regarding his complaint is still under review.

Demonstration against Shin Bet Investigations, 2015 (Photo: Hillel Meir / TPS)

Demonstrations against ISA interrogations at the String Bridge in Jerusalem December 20, 2015 (Photo: Hillel Meir / TPS, Walla system! NEWS)

Another means that could be expected to help complainants is to raise their claims in real time, and not just after the investigation. However, the case of S., which was investigated in 2015, proves that even here Bataf is imposing an impossibility. S. complained that a researcher named Assaf shook him "until he felt his head was about to fall." To yelling.

S. did not remain silent. In his investigation the next day, he complained about Assaf's treatment to a researcher named Rooney. He also repeated the complaints in four different detention hearings. Matan's decision to close the case stated that the investigation that day was indeed turbulent, including an exchange of screams and curses between S. and his interrogators. However, they decided "no real weight" could be made for his allegations of violence, partly because he raised them only the next day, And not a subsequent investigation that day.

Another reason was that S. originally claimed that during the act of violence against him by "Assaf" he entered another investigator's room called "William." On the other hand, in a questioning from the former Bataan chief, after submitting his complaint, S. claimed that "William" entered the room only after "Assaf" hit him. "A frontal contradiction of this kind, which, of course, reduces the appeal, "The credibility of the complaint," wrote former Chief of Staff at Matan, Adv. Rachel Matar, concluding: "There was no evidence of any physical violence against the complainant."

S. also repeated the complaints in four different detention hearings held for him (Photo: Niv Aharonson)

Extension of arrest for a minor who murdered Aisha a-Ravi, peace, Rishon LeZion, January 23, 2018 (Photo: Niv Aharonson)

"When the UAV departed from the ISA in 2014 to the DOJ, the move was accompanied by cheers and praise for the independence that will now become the institution. In fact, today - six years after the change - it is quite clear that the UAV is still a body with the appearance of professionalism only," she said. Dr. Rachel Strumza, executive director of the Anti-Torture Committee, which represents many GSS interrogators and assists in filing complaints. "The MBT researchers do not have the knowledge, training, manpower or guidance that will allow them to handle the hundreds of old files and dozens of new complaints filed with the MBAT each year. The data on the length of the MBT tests speak for themselves, and should have shamed the Justice Department. ".

"Even more worrying is that the investigations that are coming to the end of the process - with the result of the complaint being closed in advance - do not meet any standard of reasonableness or thoroughness," she stressed. "No forensic or medical experts are used; no medical evidence examination is required; no investigators with torture or sexual violence training are used, and the researchers' questioning" appears to be intended only to be mandatory. This is all very serious, and is an injury Serious in proper management and in good governance. " Stromza added: "It is also very worrying about the lack of professional criticism of the Office of the Met. Contrary to the DIP, which has repeatedly received the attention and reports of the State Comptroller, to the best of our knowledge, the Comptroller's Office has not examined the operation of the PTA in the last 25 years. It's no wonder that the UAV acts like it's enough for itself. "

Matan: The activity was approved by the High Court

The Ministry of Justice, which is in charge of Matan, said in response: "A complaint filed against the GSS investigator regarding an alleged offense committed by him during the performance of or in connection with his job, is ascertained by the Matan in a preliminary examination, given the sensitivity and complexity of the These investigations. This outline was approved by the High Court. As a general rule, upon filing a complaint with the UAV, a comprehensive examination of the complaint is made, which includes, inter alia, a meeting with the complainant / interrogator (to the extent that he cooperates), examination of the material relating to his investigation into the GSS, examination of the medical material in his case, and questioning the sources of the return. As relevant, as well as other factors (such as doctors or prison guards) concerned. At the end of the examination, the Chief of Staff, submits the examination file, which contains all the material collected during the course, together with the examination's findings and recommendations, to the State Prosecutor's Office, which after examining The following decides how to act in relation to the complaint: opening a criminal investigation (by the DIP), disciplinary proceedings, a commanding proceeding, lessons learned The shelving of the complaint, or any other recommendation. "

Regarding the claim that the Mabatan questioning may hurt criminal investigations: "The Mabat interrogators are certified as disciplinary investigators and are not authorized to carry out criminal investigations in relation to complaints against GSS personnel," the Ministry of Justice explained. Moreover, quite a few of the complaints against GSS investigators, even after examining the confidential materials, do not justify criminal investigation, and many other complaints include claims that even if factually correct, there is no place to be found on the criminal plane, but at most On the disciplinary level. In any case, where relevant officials believe that questioning ISA investigators may frustrate or "contaminate" a future criminal investigation, they may recommend immediate opening of a criminal investigation. "

It was also reported regarding the length of the questionnaires that "the length of the investigation is subject to the professional judgment of the MBAT researchers, depending on the circumstances and the needs of the investigation. Above all, we should state the obvious, and that the length of the investigation does not indicate its quality, for example in the case where the interrogator is asked about a specific matter. "

Regarding the duration of the case processing: "The duration of each complaint is not fixed or fixed and is influenced by various factors. Among other things, the time of treatment is affected by the fact that, according to the review mechanism, the moderator does not begin to ascertain a complaint until the complainant's trial ends (as the case has been filed against him). Charges), due to the difficulty in conducting parallel proceedings by two governing bodies. This means that many of the test actions can often only be performed within a considerable time since the complaint was filed, which inevitably hinders the examination procedure in those cases. Alongside this, the chief of staff and the newly appointed chief of staff began to shorten the handling of cases. "

"In light of the sensitivity and complexity of these cases, the decisions made by senior officials in the State Attorney's Office, and in some cases, the cases are also brought before the State Attorney and the Attorney General. Not to start an investigation. These petitions were rejected by detailed High Court decisions.

Regarding the questioning of the "Leon" researcher at the mall: "The Shin Bet interrogator will not be borrowed at the Shin Bet interrogation facility, as at the time of his interrogation he is no longer part of the Shin Bet Sector. The procedures in this regard have been sharpened after the case. "

Regarding the rejection of S.'s complaint based on the fact that he had not complained already that day: "Presenting things in your appeal is distorted, as it was one of many reasons for deciding the closing of the complaint and rejecting the appeal. The decision on rejecting the appeal also stated that the examination of the visible and confidential materials in the case The examination revealed that not only were there no indications in support of the appellant's claims, but there were indications that allegedly negated her, one of which is a frontal contradiction concerning the heart of the complaint which was found in the appellant's words, and naturally diminishes its reliability. "