T. Belman. Given how weak and unprecidented the charges are and the great service Netanyahu has redered Israel, I sincerely hope that the Knesset will grant him immunity.
Must a government be formed for this to happen?
Under Israeli law, Netanyahu can get immunity through Knesset’s House Committee if he proves that his indictment would be of great detriment to the state or if there are other unique circumstances.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit | Archives: Dudi Vaaknin
In Case 4,000, on top of the count of fraud and breach of trust, Netanyahu will face an additional count of bribery.
In Case 1,000, Netanyahu is accused of receiving gifts worth over $200,000 from friends over an extended period, while Case 2,000 and Case 4,000 both involve alleged attempts by Netanyahu to secure positive media coverage in exchange for political favors.
In Case 4,000 – considered the most serious of the three – Netanyahu is accused of expediting a regulatory change toward the merger of Israel’s two largest telecommunications companies, Bezeq and YES, in exchange for positive coverage on the Walla! news portal.
The official submission of the indictment, some two weeks after it was unveiled, triggered a 30-day period under which Netanyahu can seek immunity. Netanyahu would have to formally request the Knesset’s House Committee to grant him immunity. Under Israeli law, the committee can grant it if he can prove that his indictment would be of great detriment to the state or if there are other unique circumstances.
It is unclear whether the committee will be able to vote on any such request, since the Knesset has yet to formally appoint committee members. There is also the question of whether the Knesset is allowed to deliberate on such matters during a transition period between two governments, as is the current state of affairs.
In a letter enclosed with the indictment, Mendlebilt wrote that the document adhered to the Knesset Immunity Law, despite earlier objections raised by Netanyahu’s legal team.
“Today, December 2, 2019, will mark the beginning of the 30 days [Netanyahu] may request from the Knesset that the state will grant him immunity,” he wrote.
“In December it was revealed that Mandelblit met 71 times with members of the media, but he has refused to indicate whom he met with,” a Betzalmo attorney stated. “After much effort, we have determined that one of those media figures was none other than Aviad Glickman, who nearly nightly presented specific quotes from transcripts of witnesses in the Netanyahu investigations, as well as supposedly secret details of the investigations.”
This is a quotation from today’s Yeshiva World News. If it is accurate, and if Caroline Glick is correct that it is a crime in Israeli law to leak details of a criminal investigation to the press, it means that Mendelblit has committed at least 71 crimes in his investigation of Netanyahu.
The YWN article also points out that the police recommended that Mendelblit be indicted for obstruction of justice in 2010 in connection with the Harpaz affair, in which Gabi Ashkenazi, now a senior member of Blue-White, was also implicated.
The charges were later thrown out be the then attorney general, Yehudah Weinstein, the search committee for a new attorney general, and the Supreme Court, in 2015, paving the way for Mendelblit’s later appointment as Attorney General. Birds of a feather . . .
https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1832416/incriminating-ag-mandelblit-recordings-from-harpaz-affair-aired-on-israeli-media.html
[The definition of bribery in Israeli law is ridiculously strict. I just looked it up. For example: Any gift worth more than about $60 becomes property of the state, otherwise it’s a bribe. No wonder it’s so easy to indict sitting office-holders in Israel. I doubt there is another country in the world with such laws. And so open-ended. Take a look]:
“Specific offences and restrictions
Offences
What are the key corruption and bribery offences in your jurisdiction?
Article 5 of the Penal Law 1977 stipulates the bribery offences prosecutable and punishable under Israeli law as follows.
Bribe taking and bribery (Sections 290 to 291) A public official who agrees to or accepts any bribe in his or her official capacity may be imprisoned for up to 10 years or face a fine as set out in the law. An individual or legal person that offers or gives a public official a bribe may face a similar fine or up to seven years’ imprisonment.
Bribing a foreign public official (Section 291A) An individual or legal person that offers or gives a foreign public official any bribe in order to obtain, guarantee or promote a business activity or other related advantage will face the penalties described above.
Brokering bribery (Section 295) Individuals or legal persons are considered to have accepted a bribe if they receive (including indirectly or on behalf of another) money, a monetary equivalent, a service or any other benefit in order to offer a bribe or motivate a public official or foreign public official to discriminate or act with favouritism (Sections 295(a) and (b)).
Individual or legal persons that exert significant influence over the election of a candidate to the position of prime minister, minister, deputy minister, member of parliament or the head of a local authority will be considered to have accepted bribery if they accept money, a monetary equivalent, a service or another benefit, in order directly or indirectly to motivate the candidate to discriminate or act with favouritism in his or her official capacity (Section 295(b1)).
Lastly, an individual or legal person that offers any of the above shall be considered to have given a bribe and shall face penalties similar to those in Section 291 (Section 295(c)).
In addition to the Penal Law, each of the above bribery offences would constitute a predicate offence under Sections 2 and 3 of the Prohibition on Money Laundering Law 2000.
Hospitality restrictions
Are specific restrictions in place regarding the provision of hospitality (eg, gifts, travel expenses, meals and entertainment)? If so, what are the details?
The Public Service (Gifts) Law 1979 mandates that gifts received by any public official (ie, the holder of an office or position on behalf of the state, including a soldier as defined by the Military Justice Law 1955), which are not of nominal value, must be registered and become the property of the state. In addition, other specific acts provide for similar limits imposed on ministers, elected public officials in the local municipalities and members of parliament.
Similar provisions are included in the Government Service Regulations that apply to all public employees in Israel. The regulations define a ‘gift of small value’ as “a gift the value of which in shekels does not exceed NIS300 (approximately $60), excluding any gift given in cash”. Section 42.76 of the regulations mandates that a public employee must turn to an office or ministerial committee to determine whether any gift received may be defined as a reasonable ‘gift of small value’, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the acceptance of the gift and the standard receipt of gifts of such kind. The public employee may accept a gift only after approval by the committee.
Other laws specifically address the acceptance of gifts and hospitality and the obligation to avoid any conflicts of interest in respect of ministers and deputy ministers, members of parliament or elected officials in local authorities. These laws include:
the Rules on Prevention of Conflict of Interests of Ministers and Deputy Ministers;
the Rules on Prevention of Conflict of Interests of Elected Officials in the Local Municipalities; and
the Knesset Ethics Committee decisions on matters of conflict of interests in relation to members of parliament.
There are also various attorney general guidelines on this topic, such as Attorney General Guideline 1.1709, which prohibits the receipt of free invitations to – and tickets for – sports, arts, cultural and other events.
Facilitation payments
What are the rules relating to facilitation payments?
Facilitation payments would most probably constitute bribery under Article 5 of the Penal Law 1977. Section 293(7) to the Penal Law specifically mandates that any payment received by a public official causing it to conduct (or fail to conduct) an action in the course of its duty will be considered a bribe. This applies even when the public official has no discretion as to whether to perform the act.”
Click here to view the full article.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=87533a53-2c26-45eb-8bce-214
0cd1b4704
If Caroline Glick is correct, then the A-Gs demand is illegal. According to he, the A.G cannot lift an MKs immunity unless the “House Committee” recommends it, and the “House Committee” cannot recommend it unless there is a permanent governent in place. Also, she claims that in law, Mendelblit has merely made a formal recommendation to indict, and it will take another five months for the indictment to be formally registered and a trial date set. It seems that Mendelblit is simply making up the law as he goes along. A really atrocious situation. The illegal actions of Mendelblit and his prosecution team are a threat to the rule of law in Israel–an issue of much greater importance to Israel’s future than whether Bibi remains Prime Minister or not.
Forgot to mention–this from today’s Arutz Sheva