A/HRC/28/80 31. In the majority of cases, the principal evidence against the child was the child’s own confession.23 Israeli Military Order 1745, which came into effect on 10 September 2014, provides for the audiovisual recording of police interrogations of children, but only in relation to non-security offences. The majority of Palestinian children in detention are, however, reportedly prosecuted for alleged security offences (under Israeli Military Order 1651), in particular stone throwing. 8. Administrative detention 32. According to an Israeli non-governmental organization, in May 2014, Israel was holding 196 administrative detainees. 24 By the end of August 2014, this number reached 493 (see A/HRC/28/80/Add.1); by the end of October, there were still 457 Palestinian administrative detainees.25 33. Israel’s practice of administrative detention has been condemned by the SecretaryGeneral (A/69/347, para. 29), the High Commissioner (A/HRC/25/40, para. 40) and the Human Rights Committee (CCPR/C/ISR/CO/4, para. 10); the concerns raised remain valid today. Detainees are brought before a judge in a military court and not charged with any criminal offence. The Secretary-General and the Human Rights Committee called for an end to the administrative detention regime and stressed that detainees should be allowed to challenge their detention and, in the absence of prompt criminal charges, be released without delay (A/69/347, para. 29 and CCPR/C/ISR/CO/4, para. 10). The use of secret evidence in most cases makes it impossible for detainees to challenge the basis of their detention (A/HRC/25/40, para. 40 and CCP/C/ISR/CO/4, para. 10). Detention orders are moreover issued for one to six months, and may be renewed indefinitely. 9. Hunger strikes and sick detainees 34. From 24 April to 25 June 2014, a large number of detainees (as many as125) went on a hunger strike to protest against Israel’s continued use of administrative detention (A/69/347, para. 28). OHCHR received reports that the authorities had made attempts to break the strike, allegedly by punishing the detainees for going on strike, for instance by transferring them to other facilities, putting them in isolation, and through repeated and extensive cell searches and the denial of medical treatment. The detainees were also reportedly denied access to counsel during the hunger strike. This raises concern at the possible violations of detainees’ right to freedom of expression and with regard to the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment. At the time of the hunger strike, a bill amending the Prisons Act was brought before the Knesset that would permit force-feeding and medical treatment of prisoners on hunger strike against their will under certain conditions, in contravention of international standards. 26 The timing of the bill suggested that it may have been intended to break the strike. Following the end of the hunger strike on 25 June 2014, 23 24 25 26 UNICEF, Children in Israeli Military Detention (see footnote 19), p. 11. According to the No Legal Frontiers, a non-governmental organization, between 2010 and 2011, the vast majority of files in the juvenile justice system in Israel were based on defendants’ confessions given during police interrogations, and on incrimination by boys of similar ages given in the same circumstances. In no case was there a trial within a trial on the admissibility of the confessions” (see “All Guilty! Observations in the Military Juvenile Court 2010-11”). See also Defence for Children International Palestine, “Bound, Blindfolded and Convicted: Children held in military detention”, April 2012, p. 41. B’tselem, Statistics on Administrative Detention, 1 January 2011. Ibid. OHCHR, Press briefing notes on Israel / Occupied Palestinian Territory, 20 June 2014. 9