Final Defense Plea in the Trial of Raja Ighbary Regarding the "Incitement" File

SadaNews - Today, Wednesday, the final defense plea session was held before the Magistrate Court in Haifa, in the trial of Raja Ighbary (73 years old) from Um al-Fahm, a leader in the Follow-Up Committee and the "Sons of the Homeland" movement. This is in light of an indictment filed against him by the public prosecution in 2018, accusing him of ten posts on his Facebook page, which were deemed as "incitement to violence" and "support for a terrorist organization" under the Israeli "Anti-Terrorism" law.

 

Dozens of supporters, several Arab leaders, and Ighbary's family attended the court session today.

Ighbary was defended by a team from the Adalah Legal Center, represented by its general director, lawyer Dr. Hassan Jabareen, and lawyer Hadeel Abu Saleh, who affirmed in their plea and detailed documents that the indictment is "invalid both constitutionally and procedurally, and constitutes a serious assault on freedom of expression and legitimate political activity, especially in the Palestinian context within Israel."

The defense pointed out that "the last post attributed to the accused dates back to 2019, and since then no material has been published that can be considered directly or indirectly related to incitement or alignment with any illegal act, which in itself weakens the case." Lawyer Jabareen also explained that "the charges of alignment cannot be legally substantiated, as they are based on presumed intentions rather than clear actions or tangible evidence."

The plea emphasized that the legal provisions upon which the indictment is based – specifically sections 24(a) and 24(b) of the "Anti-Terrorism" law – suffer from serious legal ambiguity, which the police use as a tool to suppress political discourse, relying on vague terms such as "glorification," "sympathy," and "support," without a precise definition or objective test of the speaker's intentions or the impact of their words. This renders the law unconstitutional, and on this basis, Adalah requested its annulment through the plea.

The defense team elucidated that "most of the posts attributed to Ighbary are shares of previously published materials from other parties that were not prosecuted, which reveals a selective and discriminatory application of the law targeting specifically Palestinian political voices, particularly leadership."

The defense also affirmed that "the prosecution did not present any evidence proving that Ighbary's posts led or could lead to acts of violence, which is a fundamental requirement for criminalizing incitement under the law. Furthermore, the prosecution did not present any expert testimonies clarifying how the public received these posts, instead merely presenting the texts out of their social, political, and cultural context."

The defense stressed that "some of the posts relate to condoling families who lost their children or criticizing state policies and its security apparatus. Also, communication with Palestinian figures does not imply alignment with the military arms of Palestinian organizations. Therefore, these practices are legitimate and fall within the framework of political and cultural freedom of expression, especially within the Palestinian Arab community inside Israel."

Based on the above, the defense team concluded the session by requesting the court to dismiss the entire indictment and acquit Ighbary of all charges, affirming that "the continuation of the trial constitutes a dangerous precedent in the prosecution of Palestinian political discourse, and a deviation from fundamental principles of justice, foremost among them the right to a fair trial and free expression."

In this context, the Adalah Center emphasized that "this case falls within a broader policy aimed at criminalizing legitimate political activity of Palestinians inside, calling on the court not to endorse this repressive approach."

In his comments, the general director of the Adalah Center, lawyer Dr. Hassan Jabareen, stated that "what is happening before us are attempts to institutionalize a new phase of prosecution, not only for Palestinian leaders and activists inside, but also to recalibrate the political discourse to a new lower ceiling by criminalizing the current discourse – a discourse that enjoys broad consensus within our community and our Palestinian leadership."

Political activist Amir Mukhal expressed that "we have become every day a different court in light of political prosecutions. The case of Raja Ighbary has been ongoing since 2018, and it is not new. We do not hope much from these courts, but in the end, it is the state that governs and issues the decision."

Regarding the file that dates back to 2018, he clarified that "in reality, there are no dead files in Israel; everything is turning into the courts of various universities and unions, and even the residents have become courts by preventing Palestinians from entering shelters, as there is an effort for the political elimination of our community."

Anat Raja Ighbary stated that "today, a session was held to review a case dating back seven years, on which my father was previously arrested, where sessions were held before with my father outside prison, but today and due to administrative detention, the session was held with my father inside prison in a session summarizing the file."

She added, "We saw my father today for the first time in about three months for more than half a minute inside the courtroom, as we were prevented from entering the courtrooms during the administrative detention, and we were prohibited from speaking with him as well, but today the meeting was positive with my father and affected him psychologically in a good way, due to the diversity in attendance, various leaderships, and supporters with him."

It is noteworthy that this file is another and distinct case from the administrative detention file against Ighbary, which was imposed on him last April for a duration of four months, and he remains in detention.

Source: Arabs 48