http://www3.haaretz.co.il/eng/scripts/article.asp?id=38276&mador=4&datee=1/17/99
Ha'aretz, January 17, 1999
The Shin Bet's Farce
By Gideon Levy
Sometimes you read a report in the paper and you
don't know whether to laugh or cry; you can't tell
whether it's serious or someone is pulling your
leg. One such report concerns the improvements the
Shin Bet internal security service is going to
introduce in its interrogations. Last Wednesday,
attorney Shai Nitzan, from the State Prosecutor's
Office, informed a nine-member panel of the High
Court of Justice that the Shin Bet, which he was
representing in the hearing, intends to begin
using "less onerous" means of interrogation - a
"ventilated sack" and "relatively comfortable
handcuffs.".Nitzan, in all seriousness, explained
to the justices and to the petitioners -
representatives of several human rights
organizations - that the Shin Bet is aware that
some of its interrogation methods have an "onerous
effect," and therefore it has decided to inject a
bit of relief. No more stinking sack, which
according to the testimonies of interrogation
subjects is urinated on by a large number of
police officers and interrogators before it is
placed on the detainee's head for days at a time;
now we will have an "airier" sack. No more
handcuffs that rip into the skin; they will be
replaced by a newer, more comfortable model.
There will be an end to the array of weird knots
the Shin Bet has devised for us. They include the
bad old "shabah," in which interrogation subjects
are tied to a low stool that is tilted forward;
the relatively new "kasat a-tawla," a painful
stretching of the body achieved with the use of a
table and direct pressure; and the "kambaz," or
frog position, in which the interrogator forces
the subject to bend forward on the tips of his
toes with his hands tied behind, and if he falls
he is forced, with kicks and blows, to return to
the original excruciating position or face a
violent shaking. All this will now be effected
with the use of comfortable cuffs.
What induced the Shin Bet to decide to grant such
grand relief? Did it only now learn about the
"onerous effect" entailed in its methods? Are
these new technological advances? Perhaps the
danger of the "ticking bomb" has been lessened to
such a degree that the Shin Bet can allow itself
to ventilate its sacks and soften its irons? Or
does the state believe that the use of such means
will no longer be considered torture?
So the farce in the High Court of Justice
continues. A hearing of principle about the Shin
Bet's interrogation methods, which has already
been dragged out for more than five years
continues to roll from one hair-raising absurdity
to the next. In the court's previous hearing on
the petition, which was held six months ago,
someone brought a tilted footstool to show the
judges the "shabah" position; in the next session,
last week, we were told about the airy bags. The
High Court, which has lately criticized the
government for tarrying in the formulation of a
bill to regulate Shin Bet interrogations,
continues to hold the government responsible for
the most severe human rights violations being
committed in Israel. From session to session, and
the hearings are spaced months apart, the High
Court keeps declining to state its approach of
principle, which is so essential.
In the meantime, the years slide by and torture in
interrogations continues. Thousands of Palestinian
detainees go through the Shin Bet's interrogation
chambers - between 1,000 and 1,500 a year,
according to the human rights groups, and even the
Shin Bet has admitted that there are hundreds a
year - but the High Court, the beacon of justice,
remains mute. Only the state speaks out, and what
it has to say is increasingly horrific, but no one
takes notice as the torture becomes routine and,
appallingly, the discussion on torture becomes
procedural.
Originally the state denied it used torture; then
its use was said to be confined to
ultra-exceptional cases in the form of "walking,
ticking bombs"; and last Wednesday the state's
representative argued to the High Court that
violent shaking is permissible even if the subject
is not a "ticking bomb" and that it is in itself a
"legitimate and desirable act." "Can anyone shake
another person if immediate danger exists?"
Justice Shlomo Levin asked, and attorney Nitzan
replied on the spot in the affirmative.
If the method is so good, we might ask, why not
torture dangerous criminals too? And if it's so
effective, why not toughen the measures a bit -
pulling out fingernails has been known to produce
swift results.
You might think that the state has made progress.
It once denied the use of these vicious
interrogation methods and attributed them to the
Palestinians' imagination and propaganda. Today, a
state prosecutor now speaks in praise of violent
shaking (which can also be fatal, it should be
recalled). The admission, it might be thought, is
an important stage on the way to reform.
But this is not the case. The indifference with
which the public accepts the state's assertion
that it practices torture as a matter of routine
turns the horror into legitimate reality. Torture
becomes kosher - all you have to do is give the
sacks a bit of an airing out. In the Occupied
Territories there are thousands of people who bear
the scars, physical and mental, of the lengthy
interrogations they endured. Abd al-Ahmed, from
Bethlehem, pukes his guts out twice a day, Omar
Ghanimath was put through the seven circles of
hell until he was convicted of ... hiding a rifle
he received from an Israeli. In our own and
others' eyes we are a country that tortures people
under interrogation, and so far there has been no
salvation from the Supreme Court, until the next
hearing, or the one after that
(c) copyright 1998 Ha'aretz. All Rights Reserved
