This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
They're explicitly separate from debriefings by those involved in investigating incidents, including by commanders. Material from them is to go only to the military advocate general (MAG) or his representative. The latter then decides whether a debriefing offense was committed and if an investigation is warranted. If so, a summary of findings "shall not be transferred to a person undertaking a criminal investigation in accordance with the law." Nor "shall it indicate suspicion against any person involved in the incident."
An examining officer or investigative judge is charged with handling the case, the latter only if deaths are involved. The former may be a senior adjudicating military officer, another one appointed by him, or a MAG-designated military police person.
The examining officer may then hear witnesses, review evidence, and arrest suspects. He only decides whether to recommend prosecution, not order it himself. The MAG decides whether or not to proceed further. In practice, however, MIU army officers handle most ill treatment examinations, not trained lawyers familiar with the law.
The process of soldiers judging others in the ranks taints the whole process, especially the way Israel goes about it, taking care of its own. A clear conflict of interest delivers injustice.
Troublesome Forms of Investigation
They rarely happen, and when they do are effectively whitewashed, given that examining officers rely on operational debriefings supplied by the offending forces or their commanders. As a result, they're tainted and wholly unreliable. It shows up in how few are charged, let alone convicted of serious offenses, including torture and killings.
According to Law Professor Mordechai Kremnitzer:
"....There are two problems with the operational debriefing. Firstly, the person who undertakes it is not a professional investigator, with all due respect to the military commander. (In addition), when people have acted unlawfully, they have a natural motivation not to admit this, to deny it, to tell incorrect stories, and to back up each other's incorrect stories."
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
