Affidavit Regarding My Criminal Arrest

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

I am Abdul-Sattar Tawfiq Qassem Khalilieh, born in Deir al-Ghusun and a resident of the city of Nablus, holder of ID number 979955680. I hereby submit to you the following statement:

I have been subjected to repeated assaults by the Palestinian Authority over the course of many years. These assaults began in 1995, when I was shot and wounded by four bullets, and culminated in my criminal arrest on a charge of harming the reputation of individuals.

Most recently, the Palestinian Authority proceeded to arrest me on 28 July 2008. I was threatened by telephone by a person who identified himself as Mahdi Marqa on 30 December 2008, and my car was set on fire on 23 January 2009.

Al-Aqsa satellite channel interviewed me on 20 April 2009 at four-thirty in the afternoon, on three topics: internal Palestinian dialogue, the security chaos, and Egypt’s role in the region. Regarding the security chaos, I said it was one of the main causes of the internal fighting, a phenomenon that had spread malice and hatred among the ranks of the Palestinian people. When the presenter asked me about the shooting of Sheikh Hamed al-Bitawi, I told him that acts of this kind do not serve the Palestinian people, but rather serve Israel and America. The following is the literal text of what I said: “This is an attempt to raise tensions, and perhaps you have read what Avi Dichter wrote or said in recent days. Of course we know him, and he hasn’t brought anything new. He said there are some among the Palestinian leadership who are cooperating with us, with the goal of keeping a rift and a disagreement alive on the Palestinian scene, and keeping the infighting going. And of course, the infighting has not strayed far from the conduct of Palestinian leaders who constantly carry out difficult acts, assaults, violations of honor, and violations of property, in order to generate a reaction from the other side. And every time that other reaction is generated, tension rises further on the Palestinian scene, the rift widens, and we remain preoccupied fighting one another. What happened to our brother Sheikh Hamed al-Bitawi does not fall outside this framework. I heard the statement claiming this was an individual act. No — there is no individual act; even if it were individual, it would have been preceded by major, foolish incitement to carry out such acts. And of course, before that, you know they also burned my car. Why these assaults, when they all say, ‘By God, we have restored security to Nablus,’ and so on? No, they haven’t done that — they called for calm and kept those who assault people (here an unintelligible word, due to the presenter clearing his throat) tucked away in a certain corner, to release if forced to, or if they find the need requires it. Of course, what is the situation that would require that? Certainly not the Palestinian situation — rather, perhaps there are interests; certainly there are interests for Israel and the United States. And so these acts do not fall outside the ongoing series of corruption we have lived through over the years.”

No sooner had I finished the call than my mobile phone began ringing, with insults pouring in on me from people who identified themselves — among them I recall Talat Sayel, who works as a security official at An-Najah National University, and Naaman Amer, who had shot Sheikh Hamed al-Bitawi in April 2009. I gave their names to the police in Nablus. I called the police, and the officer advised me to come to the station to give a statement.

…I spoke verbally with the interrogating officer, Mr. Waddah al-Shaer from the village of Sebastia, but he leapt up from behind the table when I told him that Preventive Security had summoned me. I heard part of the conversation taking place outside, and it was clear the officer was speaking with an official from the Nablus governorate and a security agency. The officer returned and told me there was a complaint against me from a person named Naaman Amer — a name whose owner I do not know, nor do I know what the complaint was about. The officer said I had damaged his reputation because I had described him as a collaborator with Israel during a television interview. The officer took my statement, the substance of which was that I did not know the person and had not spoken about the al-Bitawi incident specifically, but had only referred to it within a general context. The result was that I found myself under arrest in the holding cell.

A short while later, the officer returned and summoned me again, saying there was another complaint against me from a person named Mahdi Marqa, over harming his reputation by saying that he was the one who had burned my car.

The officer took my statement and returned me to the holding cell. Of course, the officer produced no evidence whatsoever against me.

In the morning, that is on 21 April 2009, the police brought me before the court, and one of the two adversaries, Mahdi Marqa, appeared. The judge asked him about his complaint, and he said that I had defamed his reputation on satellite channels (Al Jazeera, Al-Hiwar, and Al-Quds) by saying he was the one who had burned my car, and that I was publishing things he could not even properly identify as being against him. The judge asked me whether I had any questions. I asked the complainant: can you name a single television program in which I mentioned your name? He answered no. I asked him whether he had read anything I had written against him, and he answered no. I told the judge my questions were finished. The judge asked him whether he had anything else he wished to say, and he said he had witnesses, but was unable to give the judge any name. However, the prosecution, represented by Roland Hamdeh, requested an opportunity to bring witnesses. I objected to the prosecution’s request because I sensed a degree of bad faith. But the judge granted the prosecution’s request, and agreed to release me on bail on condition that I appear at the court session on 14 May 2009.

But I was not permitted to return home, and I was held for two days awaiting trial on the second complaint. They detained me together with people held on murder charges, in the new prison standing in front of the Nablus Magistrate’s Court. I appeared before the court on 23 April 2009. I saw the complainant, who said he had known me in the Negev prison some 20 years earlier. As for me, I did not recognize him — it had been so many years that even if I had known him, he had completely slipped from my memory. The complainant spoke in disconnected sentences entirely lacking in precision. The only thing he was truthful about was that I had not mentioned his name in the televised interview. I was released on bail pending his producing another witness. I pointed out to the judge that a recorded tape existed, but the judge agreed to allow the witness to be brought, in accordance with the request of the prosecution, represented by Roland Hamdeh. The session was set for 26 May 2009.

I understood that it was the prosecution, or the Attorney General, who had approved my detention for these three days. He detained me despite the following:

That I am a university professor known locally, in the Arab world, and internationally;

That I have been unable to leave Palestine for thirty years, and there is no possibility of fleeing from the justice of the Attorney General;

That I was, at the time, sixty years of age;

My abundant scholarly achievements, and my ranking as one of the hundred best writers in the world.

The fact that not a single piece of evidence was ever presented to justify my detention.

The public prosecution lost both cases before the Nablus Magistrate’s Court. It appealed both cases, but lost the appeal as well.

I am prepared to answer your questions,

With respect,

Abdul-Sattar Kassem, Professor

Nablus

0599377033

09 2537982, 09 2537617

sattarkassem@hotmail.com

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “إفادة حول اعتقالي جنائيا” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.