Released Prisoner Sajed Abu Ghallous
The policies imposed on prisoners following October 7 constituted a complete deterioration of the previous state of affairs in all aspects of prison life. Notably, the revenge-driven motives of the prison guards compounded the severity of these policies, as Ben Gvir provided political cover for guards to escalate their actions against the prisoners.
In his testimony to Al-Ahd International Foundation, released prisoner Sajed Abu Ghallous describes the post-October 7 situation in the prisons, stating: “It was as though we emerged from graves.” According to him, the new policy is premised on the notion that prisons after October 7 would no longer resemble what they were before.
From the earliest days, the Prison Service declared a state of general emergency. Under this emergency law, prisons were effectively left without safeguards, and the hard-won achievements that prisoners had accumulated over the long history of the prisoner movement’s struggle were stripped away. A policy of minimal provisions was thus instituted across every aspect of prisoners’ lives.
Overcrowding Policy
Among the new regulations launched by the Zionist Minister of Security, Ben Gvir, against prisoners was the declaration of an “overcrowding” policy. As a result, the rate of arrests in the West Bank and Jerusalem rose significantly, increasing the number of prisoners in custody. This is in addition to the unpublicized arrests that took place in Gaza since the beginning of the war.
Under the new law, conditions inside the prisons deteriorated further. Before the war, the prevailing regulations stipulated that each cell accommodate six prisoners. However, with the emergency declaration and the rise in arrests, the number of prisoners in each cell increased to twelve. Consequently, cells became severely overcrowded, and many additional inmates were forced to sleep on the floor.
This new policy has intensified prisoners’ suffering, particularly in light of the cancellation of the organizational framework inside the prisons. In certain cases, prisoners who required specific psychological care and monitoring were instead placed among the general prison population. Prison authorities then used these individuals as a pretext to launch raids and assaults on prisoners’ cells.
Moreover, after the organizational framework was abolished, there was no longer any representative or spokesperson for the prisoners; each prisoner became individually accountable for his actions. As a result, the prisoners’ situation is now subject to the whims of the supervising officer: a single disapproving look can lead to the decision to raid cells, beat prisoners, and subject them all to ill-treatment.
Denial of All Conditions Essential to Human Life
Prison authorities imposed a policy of severe restriction and minimal allowances on detainees, depriving them even of personal hygiene maintenance. Cleaning materials were in short supply, and some of the limited items provided were past their expiration dates, resulting in widespread skin diseases among the detainees.
Following the war, a single bottle of shampoo had to be shared among eleven detainees for an entire month. Sajed Abu Ghallous states: “We had very limited quantities of shampoo, and there was no supply of hot water. Many detainees went long periods without bathing, which caused skin ailments and accelerated the spread of scabies among them, resulting in further transmission of infection.”
Moreover, access to the bathroom became contingent upon going to the fura (the scheduled outdoor or courtyard break). When the fura was canceled, it became difficult to use the bathroom. Even if a detainee was permitted to go, the time allowed was only a few minutes, disregarding basic bodily needs, particularly during the summer months.
In this context, Mr. Abu Ghallous reports: “Around thirty-three of us would be taken to the fura yard for only one hour, during which we were all expected to shower. However, there were only nine available showerheads. Many detainees had to return to their cells without showering due to insufficient time or because a guard claimed that one of the detainees had committed an infraction in the yard. In such cases, we would all be collectively punished by losing our fura break, effectively denying us the opportunity to shower. This occurred repeatedly.”
As for electricity, it was cut off throughout most of the day and only restored for one hour during the evening headcount. The cells were extremely dark because they were sealed off, to the extent that, in some cells, detainees could hardly see one another—particularly in winter. The prison cells resembled graves.
It is noteworthy that the detainees were denied the fura altogether for five months at the start of the war, thereby depriving them of access to bathrooms and personal hygiene. As a result, detainees were forced to wash themselves in their cells with cold water, which was also only available at designated times. Even after fura was eventually permitted within the prison sections, scarcely a week would pass without collective punishment and the reimposition of the ban on fura.
Medical Neglect
Following the outbreak of the conflict, the entire medical care system underwent a significant deterioration. Previously, two detainees from each wing were permitted daily access to the wing clinic, and one detainee per day could visit the dental clinic. All necessary medications were fully distributed. However, after the war, each detainee’s medical status and medication requirements were re-assessed, resulting in the denial of many needed medications and treatments.
Access to the prison clinic became nearly impossible. Sajed Abu Ghallous explains, “There was a detainee who suffered from severe and persistent tooth pain for more than six months. We repeatedly submitted requests for him to visit the dental clinic, but each time we were refused. After that lengthy period, permission was finally granted only because his condition had significantly worsened.”
A new policy of deliberate and intentional neglect was enforced, accompanied by a clear message to the detainees: “If a detainee dies, then you may call us; otherwise, we do not want to hear from you, and you are prohibited from requesting the nurse or physician.” Numerous incidents in the prisons confirmed the reality of this policy, which has led to the deaths of several detainees.
In his testimony regarding one detainee’s critical condition, Abu Ghallous recalls: “A detainee in the cell next to mine was close to dying. For more than an hour, we shouted for the nurse, but to no avail. Thankfully, there was a fellow detainee among us who had worked as a nurse prior to his arrest. He provided medical guidance, and the other detainees were able to help. After more than two hours, the nurse finally arrived, looked briefly at the detainee, and did nothing. They seemed to be waiting only for news of his death so they could remove him from the cell.”
With regard to the outbreak of scabies, the first case in the wing involved a detainee transferred from the Negev Prison. Management neither isolated him nor provided treatment. Instead, he was placed in a cell with other detainees. Due to the prevailing overcrowding policy, the infection spread within that cell and subsequently throughout the wing, ultimately infecting all detainees.
The disease then proliferated rapidly among the detainees, and its symptoms became increasingly severe because of deliberate neglect. Abu Ghallous describes the symptoms they experienced from scabies: “Although the severity varied, all of us felt as though a fire, like an electric current, was coursing through our bodies. We endured unrelenting itching and were unable to sleep. Boils spread extensively over our skin. In many cases, they prevented detainees from moving normally or even using the bathroom. Many developed severe skin infections and tissue decay where these boils appeared.”
Commenting on his personal ordeal, Abu Ghallous states: “For three consecutive months, I can say with certainty that I never experienced a full night’s sleep. I would try to exhaust myself physically during the day just to be able to sleep at night, but it was impossible due to the pain. I could hardly stand for prayer. This condition persisted for several months until the prison administration finally began allowing treatment.”
He further adds that detainees reached a point where many wished they would die, given the intensity of the pain and suffering, coupled with the harsh detention conditions and the lack of proper medical oversight. “A detainee near me almost died from the severity of his condition—his body was so badly affected by the disease that he screamed continuously from pain, and we were powerless to help him. Another detainee was unable to feed himself because of boils that immobilized his hands; he could not even dress himself or tend to his basic needs.”
No treatment was administered to the detainees until several months later. The administration’s eventual decision to introduce medication was prompted by fears that they themselves might become infected through daily contact with the detainees. For instance, in Ramon Prison, one detainee’s condition deteriorated so severely that boils and lesions covered his face and body, oozing pus and blood. With no dressings available, his clothes were soaked in blood, and he was rendered immobile and unable to walk. Other detainees had to carry him from his cell to the main wing door. When the attending physician saw the detainee’s condition, he was visibly shocked and recoiled.
Following this incident, the administration initiated partial treatment but failed to implement all necessary measures, such as isolating infected detainees. They also provided only one dose of a three-dose course, which every detainee was supposed to receive. Consequently, the disease persisted and continued to spread among the detainees.
Systematic Torture Policy
The prison administration deemed the prisons the weakest arena in which to channel its hostility and vent its anger following October 7, employing a series of punitive and retaliatory measures. They also viewed the detainees as responsible for instigating the October 7 attack under the pretext that the operation was carried out to secure their release. As a result, a forceful campaign was waged against them, with the notion that they must bear the cost of the events.
From the very first day of the conflict, the Prison Service brought in forces from all prison units, who raided every wing heavily armed with various types of weaponry. Assaults and beatings commenced during the earliest hours. We saw detainees bleeding from head wounds. They took us out of our cells into the prison yard, forced us to line up in two rows, kneel, and lower our heads to the ground, then proceeded to severely beat us. This amounted to deliberate humiliation carried out under the threat of arms.
We were taken aback to see prison employees, including office staff and the individual in charge of the canteen, participating in these raids. They stormed into the cells and confiscated everything within reach. Even the employees’ original roles were reassigned after the war; they became part of the repressive apparatus—no different from the prison guards themselves.
Within the prison, the nurse likewise became part of the internal suppression system. He would raid cells, conduct searches, and at times beat and assault detainees. Released prisoner Sajed Abu Ghallous relates one such incident: “A detainee once called for the nurse to request medication, but his request was denied. Frustrated with the dire conditions, the detainee voiced his complaint. The nurse then claimed that the detainee had insulted him, and within a matter of hours, the Metsada Unit raided that detainee’s cell and violently assaulted everyone inside. The nurse was among those participating in the raid.”
They used tear gas and stun grenades during repeated prison raids. Previously, raids were relatively infrequent and typically occurred at night. After the war, however, raids became continual and could happen at any time. For example, in the cell adjacent to ours, where older detainees such as Dr. Ghassan Dhouqan from Nablus and Sheikh Al-Saadi from Jenin Refugee Camp were held, the Metsada forces stormed the cell with firearms, acted with extreme brutality, beat them severely, and threw tear gas at them upon leaving. They almost suffocated, and we nearly lost them as a result of this assault.
In the case of Dr. Durar Abu Sisi from Gaza, they shot him, bound him, and physically assaulted him before dragging him in a degrading manner to the prison yard along with all detainees in his cell. They forced them to lie face down for extended hours in the bitter cold of December. According to Abu Ghlous, that day was one of the most difficult they had ever experienced in that wing, marked by severe beatings and live fire. None of the detainees could intervene in any way, since even the slightest reaction prompted direct gunfire.
Punitive use of tear gas recurred frequently and with no apparent cause. On one occasion, forces entered for a search, removed the detainees from our cell and the adjacent cell, and confined us in the external shower stalls of the wing. Before we were made to enter, they gassed the stalls. Approximately twenty-two detainees were packed into a space of only a few square meters, leading to near-suffocation both from the gas and from being crammed so tightly together.
On the anniversary of October 7, detainees anticipated raids, but we did not foresee the extreme level of brutality and violence that ensued. The guards severely beat all detainees, forcing everyone to lie face down in the yard in a display of deliberate humiliation. They brought in female soldiers solely to observe and record the scene. These soldiers stood beside us, indeed, on top of us, and took photographs.
In essence, the prisons turned into a genuine war zone. Armed forces stormed in, equipped with all manner of weapons, and used stun grenades in the wing yard, creating a scene reminiscent of warfare, calculated to sow terror and fear in the detainees. Given the severity of the campaign, the scope of the suppression, the beatings, and the torture, we anticipated casualties among detainees. They deliberately targeted and brutalized certain prisoner leaders in front of us, focusing on them in particular. Following this incident, I can assert that more than half of the detainees sustained broken ribs.
Every development taking place outside the prison had immediate repercussions on the detainees. For instance, upon news of the martyrdom of Al-Sinwar or Ismail Haniyeh, the entire wing would be locked down. The prisons became subject to the whims of the guards and officers. The hierarchical structure that existed before the war within the Israeli Prison Service (Shabas) and its units completely collapsed. A mere policeman could now make decisions that previously would have required the approval of higher-ranking authorities.
Moments of Freedom
We were not aware of any news concerning the prisoner exchange deal or its details. After they lifted our quarantine in Ramon Prison and resumed court sessions, one of the detainees went to a court hearing where the lawyer informed him about the deal. We also received updates about the truce and certain names circulating from the media and newly re-arrested detainees.
In the early morning hours, prison guards entered our wings. Abu Ghallous describes the scene: “We heard the locks opening. Everyone was on edge, waiting for his turn. They told me that I was being transferred and instructed me to put on the Shabas uniform. At that moment, I realized I was among those who would be released. Consequently, I left behind all my belongings, particularly clothing, for the fellow detainees.”
They moved us to what is referred to as the ‘emtanaa’ (temporary waiting area) outside the wing, subjected us to a strip search, and beat us during the process. They then transferred us to the Negev Prison. The procedures there were similarly harsh: searching, beatings, assaults, verbal abuse, and insults.
They dragged us in a humiliating manner they called the “train walk,” where each detainee was forced to hold the handcuffs of the person in front of him in his teeth, and no one was permitted to raise his head. Anyone who loosened his grip on these handcuffs was beaten. This practice caused many detainees to suffer broken front teeth. Abu Ghallous recounts: “I had not cut my hair for over five months. They pulled me by my hair and pushed me with all their strength, even though my hands and feet were shackled. Their goal was to humiliate us and demean our dignity until the very last moment.”
