B’Tselem appeals decision not to indict in wounding of Eran Cohen at demonstration in Bil'in,

14 March 2008



Published:
7 Mar 2013

On 3 March 2013 Attorney Gaby Lasky filed an appeal on behalf of B’Tselem to the Military Advocate General (MAG) against the decision by the Military Advocate for Operational Matters not to indict anyone for shooting a rubber-coated metal bullet at Israeli Eran Cohen during a demonstration in Bil'in on 14 March 2013.

On 14 March 2008, during a demonstration against the Separation Barrier, an Israeli military officer fired a rubber-coated metal bullet from very close range at a demonstrator, Cohen, who was 18 at the time. The incident was filmed by two separate photographers, an Israeli woman and a Palestinian man. The footage clearly shows that Cohen was doing nothing that posed any danger whatsoever to the soldiers. The officer fired at Cohen from a distance of only a few meters, although the military prohibits the use of rubber-coated metal bullets at distances under fifty meters, because doing so may be lethal. Cohen was taken to Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, where the bullet was removed from his thigh.

On 1 January 2012, the Military Advocate for Operational Matters (MAOM) Corps notified B’Tselem that it was closing the case. B’Tselem sought to learn the reasons for this decision, but was rebuffed. In addition, on behalf of Eran Cohen, B’Tselem requested to see all the investigatory material. B’Tselem received and examined the material it had been sent. Further to a protracted correspondence with the MAOM Corps to receive additional investigatory material and to learn the reasons for the decision to close the case, B'Tselem submitted its appeal.

In the appeal, Attorney Lasky emphasized that the investigatory material in the file, including the two videos filmed during the demonstration and conveyed by B’Tselem to the investigators, proves indisputably 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 unjust and should be reversed. Moreover, Attorney Lasky noted that the investigation failed completely in examining the broader issues and implications of the case. The investigatory 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 in 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,.

remainder: http://www.btselem.org/20130307_appeal_in_case_of_officer_injuring_demonstrator