Lawyers for Justice Group highly commends the judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance of Nablus, acting in its appellate capacity, in the Misdemeanor Appeal Case No. 42/2026, which ruled to accept the appeal in substance and acquitted the activists Huda Hussein Rashid Al-Bishr and Fatima Hussein Rashid Al-Bishr of the charges imputed to them. This ruling overturns their prior conviction by the Salfit Conciliation Court in Criminal Case No. 1295/2025, which had sentenced each of them to one month of imprisonment.
The Group considers the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal to be a victory for the freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the right to peaceful assembly guaranteed under the Palestinian Basic Law and international human rights conventions acceded to by the State of Palestine. It reaffirms that participation in peaceful events and protests must neither be criminalized nor subject its participants to criminal prosecution.
Furthermore, the Group emphasizes that deploying Penal Code provisions pertaining to the insult of public officials or defamation of public authorities against male and female activists for exercising their rights to expression and peaceful assembly poses a severe threat to public freedoms, curtails the civic space, and undermines the right to public participation.
The appeal filed by Lawyers for Justice Group challenging the court of first instance’s judgment was predicated on several substantive legal pillars. Foremost among these was the invalidity of the arrest and arbitrary detention procedures, wherein the Group argued that Articles (29 and 107) of the Criminal Procedure Law were violated due to the total absence of any lawful arrest warrant issued by the competent authorities within the case file, coupled with the absence of flagrante delicto (in flagrant delict) or reasonable suspicion (Article 30). In addition, the two appellants were detained at the police station for seven continuous hours without legal justification following the conclusion of their interrogation, a fact that taints the procedures with an invalidity that legally extends to nullify all subsequent actions taken against them. Moreover, the evidence was contaminated by temporal and spatial contradictions between the investigative file and the testimonies delivered before the court, along with the total absence of any technical exhibit or supporting corroborative evidence conclusively linking the two accused to the incident. Consequently, this necessitated the application of the constitutional and legal maxim enshrined in the Basic Law and international conventions and covenants, dictating that “doubt shall be interpreted in favor of the accused,” and reverting to the general presumption of innocence.
Lawyers for Justice Group calls for the imperative respect of constitutional and human rights standards when dealing with cases involving freedom of opinion and expression. It further demands the cessation of prosecuting activists on the grounds of their human rights or community advocacy, and underscores the necessity of ensuring that the criminal justice system is not utilized as a tool to restrict public freedoms.
Lawyers for Justice Group
May 25, 2026
