Before the Ramallah Court of First Instance

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

I have had a compensation claim before the Ramallah Court of First Instance since April 3, 2007, case number 101/2007. The case is a claim against the Palestinian Authority for financial compensation because of my detention for nearly six months without announced reasons and without trial. The compensation sought amounts to 30,000 Jordanian dinars, for fee purposes, and the lawyer at the time, the late Mr. Abdul-Karim Hammad, may God have mercy on him, reserved the right to claim more than that.

The person now handling the case is the lawyer Imad Salah al-Din, from Talluza.

The Palestinian Authority detained me for about six months while I was on sabbatical leave from An-Najah National University. It was the first time in history that a university professor spent his sabbatical leave in prison for unknown reasons — reasons I believe were political. No one told me why I was arrested, and no one told me why I was released. I was simply placed in a prison teeming with fleas, and no one ever charged me with anything.

The lawyer at the time obtained a ruling from the High Court of Justice that my detention was unlawful, and the court ordered my immediate release. That “immediate” never happened, and no one honored it.

The case has now reached the stage of submitting written evidence, and my evidence is as follows:

The ruling of the High Court of Justice, and the judicial deliberations that accompanied it;

Documentary proof of my employment contracts with Birzeit University and with a research center in Nablus during my sabbatical leave. Of course, the salaries from these were lost;

Certificates from doctors and hospitals attesting to an illness I contracted during my detention, from which I still suffer to this day;

A certificate from An-Najah University’s personnel office confirming that I was on sabbatical leave, and clarifying that I was drawing my salary from An-Najah University, but that I did not receive my two outside salaries from Birzeit University and from the scientific research center;

Documents proving the impact of my detention on members of my family, particularly the one who was at the tawjihi (secondary school certificate) stage.

This is in addition to the moral damages suffered by me and my family, lawyers’ fees, and the costs of seeking treatment, given that insurance only covered direct medical costs.

Before the Ramallah Court of First Instance

2

Abdul-Sattar Kassem

January 21, 2011

As a reminder, this is a case I have brought against the Palestinian Authority regarding my detention for a period of about six months without cause, with the High Court of Justice having ruled that my detention was unlawful, and no release having taken place.

The lawyer, Mr. Imad Salah al-Din, submitted the rest of his evidence to the judge, and gave a copy of each piece of evidence to the representative of the Public Prosecution, since he had not been present at the preceding session. The Public Prosecution contested a number of the pieces of evidence we submitted:

It contested a document issued by the director of the scientific research center, claiming that this center is fictitious. It appears the Prosecution does not know that this center was raided in 2002, during the Zionist invasion of the West Bank cities, and that all its contents were confiscated and it was shut down. The center was located on the eighth floor of the Shantir building in Nablus. It appears the Prosecution ought to verify its information, and to verify that the center’s director, Dr. Omar Abdel Razeq, is currently detained by the Zionists.

The Public Prosecution contested the medical reports issued by two private hospitals in Nablus, on the grounds that they are not government hospitals. This, of course, is a contestation that has nothing to do with the law.

The Prosecution contested the document showing my salary statement because it was issued in 2010, and said that I must produce a salary statement specific to the year in which the detention occurred. This objection ignores the fact that the real value of my salary in the year of the detention is higher than the real value of my salary in 2010.

The Prosecution requested time to submit its evidence, and the judge set a session for January 23, 2011.

Awaiting the Public Prosecutor’s evidence

Before the Ramallah Court of First Instance

3

The deputy prosecutor came to the session of January 23, 2011 without evidence, and asked for more time. The judge told him he would give him an additional week, at which the deputy prosecutor grumbled and expressed surprise to the judge at the secret of the haste in this case, given that the case has been pending since April 3, 2007. In the end, the judge gave him a two-week extension.

The deputy prosecutor appeared two weeks later without evidence, saying he had requested evidence from the police director and from An-Najah University. The judge (note that five judges rotated through this case from September 19, 2010 until March 14, 2011) gave him five weeks to bring the evidence. This was a problem created by the process of transferring the case file from one judge to another. The grace period was very long.

On the day of the session on March 14, 2011, Judge Huda Mar’i happened to be busy, so the head of the court transferred the file to Judge Mr. Ezz al-Din without the lawyer’s knowledge, and the case was postponed until April 12 due to the lawyer’s absence. The lawyer had left the courthouse, only to return late for the moment the judge became free.

It is clear that the deputy prosecutor is stalling, and that he certainly has no evidence at all. There is a ruling from the High Court of Justice on the unlawful detention, and there are documents proving my claim. He will continue to maneuver, but the hope is that the judge will arm himself with courage and not yield to the demands of procrastination.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “لدى محكمة بداية رام الله” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.