Upon the submission of the indictment against Mordechai Vanunu on 17.3.05, ACRI was shocked to discover that ACRI Attorney Oded Feller’s name appears in the list of witnesses for the prosecution. It is public knowledge that Attorney Feller was Mr. Vanunu’s counsel on behalf of ACRI, and represented him during initial legal proceedings, and appeared together with me before the Supreme Court to object to the restrictions.
Although, theoretically, the testimony that is required from Attorney Feller is technical in nature, and although there is only a small chance that he will be called to give testimony, the very fact of the inclusion of an Attorney’s name in the list of witnesses for the prosecution against his/her client is a serious and extreme step to take, and can only be justified in extremely unusual cases in which the testimony is critical to prove a basic component of the proof attesting to a specific crime.
These were not the circumstances in this particular case. The importance of Attorney Feller’s testimony appears to relate solely to a letter written to him by the head of the Home Front Command. The letter refers to an order (prior to its issuance) that imposes a series of restrictions on Mr. Vanunu’s freedom of movement and contact with foreign nationals, and advice on how to implement the prohibition on the aforementioned contact. Furthermore, according to the definition of the evidence ordinance, the letter cannot be considered a matter of public record. There is also no indication that it will be submitted as evidence to the court. Thus, from a judicial perspective it is clear that the “recommendations” included in the letter have no judicial validity, cannot be considered to be part of the order itself, and has no bearing on the nature of the proof of the alleged crime.
Even if this was not the purpose behind the inclusion of Attorney Feller’s name in the list of witnesses for the prosecution, the result is the creation of a barrier between him and Mr. Vanunu. According to the law they are forbidden from conversing until either the completion of Attorney Feller’s testimony, or until a decision is taken that it is not required. This is particularly significant when one considers that it is at a time when the state agencies are due to inform Mr. Vanunu whether or not they intend to extend the orders issued against him.
Unfortunately, this incident follows a series of other incidents that have occurred recently, in which defense attorneys have been questioned by the police about their work with their clients, one of which was even included in the list of prosecution witnesses that are due to testify against his own client. These incidents make it apparent that the law enforcement agencies are completely insensitive to the critical importance of an attorney’s work in general, and of criminal attorneys in particular.
In light of the aforementioned I respectfully request that Attorney Feller’s name be removed form the list of witnesses in the indictment that was issued against Mr. Mordechai Vanunu, and that you instruct the prosecution and the police to adopt the required special caution when dealing with attorneys in general.
Dan Yakir,
Chief Legal Counsel for the Association for Civil Rights in Israel
last updated : 21/03/05
