Atty. Rinat Kitai, of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, says that the organization has registered its protest against the Parole Board\' refusal to grant parole to Margalit Har-Shefi. Har-Shefi began serving a nine-month sentence this past March for \"not preventing\" the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin. Speaking with Arutz-7 yesterday, Atty. Kitai said,
\"There are clear criteria when a prisoner should receive parole. In this case, this was a first offense, a short prison term, and there was no argument that she had been on \'good behavior.\' Nor was there any suspicion that she would commit further crimes. Despite this, the Parole Board based its decision on two considerations, both of which are very problematic and strike a blow at civil rights.
\"The first consideration was that of \"loss of public confidence\" [i.e., her release might cause the public to lose confidence in the judicial system]. This is a very problematic explanation, because it leaves the way open for political considerations. In addition, however, in this case it is certainly not applicable, for the following reasons:
* The sentence she received was clearly on the strict side, in light of a minority opinion calling only for six months of public service;
* She did not receive a pardon;
* The state did not claim that the sentence was too light...
\"The Parole Board\'s second consideration for rejecting parole was \"lack of remorse.\" But this cannot be a reason for no parole. It can sometimes indicate a possible suspicion that the person may commit the same crime again. But here again this does not apply, because the reason she did not express regret is because she continues to maintain her innocence. How can she express regret for something she feels she didn\'t do? This is something from the times of the Inquisition, where they would force a person to clear his name by expressing remorse for what he was accused of, but one would think that we have come a long distance since then... In addition, she [Har-Shefi] strongly condemned the murder, said that she would have turned him [assassin Yigal Amir] in if she had known in advance, and said clearly that a person must do what he can to prevent crimes, such that her lack of remorse cannot be used against her.\"
President Moshe Katzav said last month that he would make a final decision on Margalit Har-Shefi\'s family\'s request for a pardon for her after the Prisons Service committee decides whether she is to be paroled. The President may be faxed at (+972-2) 561-1033; more information on the case, including opinions of legal experts against Har-Shefi\'s conviction, can be found at \"www.harshefi.org.il/Eng/index.htm.\"
\"There are clear criteria when a prisoner should receive parole. In this case, this was a first offense, a short prison term, and there was no argument that she had been on \'good behavior.\' Nor was there any suspicion that she would commit further crimes. Despite this, the Parole Board based its decision on two considerations, both of which are very problematic and strike a blow at civil rights.
\"The first consideration was that of \"loss of public confidence\" [i.e., her release might cause the public to lose confidence in the judicial system]. This is a very problematic explanation, because it leaves the way open for political considerations. In addition, however, in this case it is certainly not applicable, for the following reasons:
* The sentence she received was clearly on the strict side, in light of a minority opinion calling only for six months of public service;
* She did not receive a pardon;
* The state did not claim that the sentence was too light...
\"The Parole Board\'s second consideration for rejecting parole was \"lack of remorse.\" But this cannot be a reason for no parole. It can sometimes indicate a possible suspicion that the person may commit the same crime again. But here again this does not apply, because the reason she did not express regret is because she continues to maintain her innocence. How can she express regret for something she feels she didn\'t do? This is something from the times of the Inquisition, where they would force a person to clear his name by expressing remorse for what he was accused of, but one would think that we have come a long distance since then... In addition, she [Har-Shefi] strongly condemned the murder, said that she would have turned him [assassin Yigal Amir] in if she had known in advance, and said clearly that a person must do what he can to prevent crimes, such that her lack of remorse cannot be used against her.\"
President Moshe Katzav said last month that he would make a final decision on Margalit Har-Shefi\'s family\'s request for a pardon for her after the Prisons Service committee decides whether she is to be paroled. The President may be faxed at (+972-2) 561-1033; more information on the case, including opinions of legal experts against Har-Shefi\'s conviction, can be found at \"www.harshefi.org.il/Eng/index.htm.\"