Military Police reinvestigates footage it received 7 years ago, shortly after shooting incident
13 تموز/يوليو 2015
On 10 March 2015, Major Harel Weinberg – Deputy Military Advocate for Operational Matters –informed B’Tselem that investigation concerning the injury of Eran Cohen would be renewed. Cohen had been hit by a rubber-coated metal bullet seven years earlier, on 14 March 2008, when he was shot at a demonstration in the West Bank village of Bil’in against the Separation Barrier being built on village land. Major Weinberg said that a decision had been made to “carry out several technical actions to re-examine the video footage in the case file, in order to examine the possibility of extracting additional evidence that would enable furthering proceedings in the case.” He added that the investigators of the Military Police Investigations Unit (MPIU) had been directed to complete these actions as quickly as possible. This, among other reasons, because of the long time that has elapsed since the incident.
Weinberg’s letter was sent in response to B’Tselem’s appeal of the decision to close the case file. In the appeal, filed on 3 March 2013 by Att. Gaby Lasky, B’Tselem argued that the investigative material in the file, including the two videos filmed during the demonstration and conveyed by B’Tselem to the investigators about a month after the incident, provides incontrovertible evidence that the officer fired a rubber-coated metal bullet at Cohen at close range, in complete violation of open-fire regulations, injuring him in the leg. Hence, the decision to close the file is patently unsound and should be reversed.
Footage of the incident filmed by Li Lorian
Footage of the incident filmed by ‘Imad Burnat
Major Weinberg’s response is puzzling. If further evidence can indeed be gleaned from the footage, why was this not done in the course of the lengthy MPIU investigation? It is also not clear why the MAG Corps took two years to reach this decision. Given these unreasonable delays, Major Weinberg’s instructions to the MPIU to act “as quickly as possible” rings hollow.
The MAG Corps’ foot-dragging in this case is not unusual. However, it is particularly glaring in this case, with its indisputable evidence of the unlawful firing of rubber-coated metal bullets. Even if the MAG eventually decides to indict any of the persons involved, the military’s handling of this case precludes any possibility that the law enforcement system will deter security forces operating in the West Bank from similar action. This policy of the MAG Corps therefore compromises the basic safety and lives of civilians.
Background on the incident and the appeal
On 14 March 2008, during a demonstration against construction of the Separation Barrier on Bil’in village land, an officer fired a rubber-coated metal bullet at close range at Eran Cohen, an 18-year-old Israeli demonstrator. Cohen was evacuated by his companions to Assaf Harofeh Medical Center in Israel, where he underwent surgery to have the slug removed from his thigh.
The incident was captured on video by two photographers, an Israeli and a Palestinian. The footage clearly shows that Cohen did nothing that could endanger the troops. It is also clear from the footage that, when the officer fired, he was no more than a few meters from the demonstrator. Military regulations prohibit firing rubber-coated bullets at a distance of under fifty meters, because they can be lethal when fired at less than that distance.
In response to a query by B’Tselem, the MAG Corps announced on 1 May 2008 that the MPIU had opened a criminal investigation into the circumstances of the shooting. On 1 January 2012, B’Tselem was informed that the investigation had been closed. On 3 March 2013, further to a protracted correspondence with the MAG Corps to receive the full investigative file and to learn the grounds for closing the case, Att. Gaby Lasky filed an appeal of the decision on behalf of B’Tselem. The appeal was filed without the MAG Corps having provided B’Tselem with its reasons for closing the case, arguing that it was not obliged to do so.
In the appeal, Att. Lasky argued that the investigative material in the file – including the two videos – confirmed the shooting officer’s identity and proved that he acted against regulations when he fired. She therefore demanded that he be indicted. Moreover, Att. Lasky noted that the investigation did not examine the broader issues and implications of the case, including the following: The investigative material made no mention of the question of permission having been granted for firing rubber-coated metal bullets or the necessity for firing such bullets at that particular demonstration; of the training of security forces and their knowledge of open-fire regulations; or even of the fact that, contrary to regulations, the injured youth, Eran Cohen, was given no medical aid,.
B’Tselem has cautioned repeatedly that security forces personnel often use rubber-coated metal bullets in contravention of regulations. Since 2000, 23 Palestinians, including 13 minors, have been killed by this type of ammunition. Given the risks of rubber-coated metal bullets, and pursuant to a recommendation by the Orr Commission, us of this ammunition was prohibited within Israel. In the Occupied Territories, however, they are still in use by the security forces.
In response to a letter from B’Tselem dated 31 August 2008 to then Attorney General Menachem (Meni) Mazuz, demanding enforcement of open-fire regulations regarding rubber-coated metal bullets and full accountability in cases in which security forces violate those orders, Deputy State Attorney (special assignments) Shai Nitzan replied on 29 February 2012:
We have been advised that the IDF overall, and the MAG Corps in particular, view any deviation from the open-fire regulations with utmost seriousness. Hence, any complaint submitted to the MAG Corps suggesting that IDF soldiers used rubber bullets other than in accordance with the open-fire orders, including when dealing with disturbances of the peace, is carefully and seriously investigated. We have been advised that, in appropriate cases, the MAG Corps orders an MPIU investigation, and when evidence is found that a violation has occurred – the MAG Corps takes action to bring to justice those responsible.
Yet the MAG Corps’ decision in the present case illustrates only too well that actions speak louder than words. B’Tselem and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel sent a further letter on this matter to then Deputy State Attorney (special assignments) Shai Nitzan on 28 July 2013 – almost two years ago – but no response has been received to date.
