The punishment policy in Israel requires prosecuting not only private individuals but also the companies they head. • Ministry of Justice confirms in response to "Israel Today" request: "No decision has yet been reached" • Bezeq may also face charges • Fines may reach dozens Millions of shekels

• Moses (right) and Allovich (left) // Photo Archive: Gideon Markovic

The Justice Ministry said that a decision has not yet been made on whether to prosecute "Bezeq", "Walla!" And "Yedioth Ahronoth" in the 2000 and 4000 files. In doing so, they confirm that the subject is indeed under examination.

The indictment against the prime minister has long been written about the share of three large corporations in the offenses attributed to him: "Bezeq", "Yedioth Ahronoth" and the company "Walla!" According to the charges, these corporations were not only involved in criminal acts, but also received as a result Benefits worth hundreds of millions of shekels.

Mandelblit on charges against Netanyahu: "I made the decision with a heavy but whole heart" // Photo: Ami Shamir

According to the enforcement policy outlined in the State Attorney's Guidelines and case law, in such situations it is necessary to prosecute not only the private individuals involved in the offenses, but also the companies themselves - the economic corporations that benefited or should benefit from the offense.

However, in the indictment filed last week, the names of the companies in question did not appear. In a letter sent by Attorney Michael Dvorin to Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit and State Attorney Shai Nitzan, which is first published here, he also demands that the companies be prosecuted in the 2000 and 4000 cases, in accordance with common enforcement policy. "Yedioth Ahronoth," Arnon (Noni) Moses, and against Bezeq's controlling shareholder, Shaul Eloovic.

In response to the request for "Israel Today", the Ministry of Justice said that the possibility of prosecuting the corporations was being considered, but "no corporate hearing has been held. No decision has yet been made on their case." This means that if decided to accuse them, the companies would be, "Walla!" And Yedioth Ahronoth is facing the threat of paying tens of millions of shekels, if not more.

In addition, this apparently raises questions about the indictment against Netanyahu and the others involved in the case, since if all the decisions in the case have not yet been decided, why was the indictment filed at this time?

The indictment alleges that Bezeq illegally received regulatory and other benefits from the USSR and gave it benefits from its subsidiary, "Walla!", Even in the 2000 case in which Yedioth Ahronoth publisher was accused of attempting to bribe the USSR , Moses acted on behalf of Yedioth Ahronoth, which he owns and not on his own.

And so the gift that was offered by him was to be given by the corporation - Yedioth Ahronoth - and not by Moses as a private person, and who would benefit if the bribe proposal was successful and "Israel Today" would close or reduce its circulation due to legislation on the subject - was a corporation "Latest news".

More on:

The publication was intended to erase the terrible impression of Moses' transcripts in the police force

Opinion | The worst bribery deal in history

The disappearing document that undermines the 4000 file

The Allovichs will be charged with bribery in Case 4000; Moses will be charged with bribery in the 2000 case

The prosecution's embarrassment: Pilver did not deliver the goods

Indictments "were for some reason only filed against private individuals, and not filed against any corporation," said a letter sent by Dvorin calling on Moshe Ifergan's name. "Given the substantial share of the above corporations in the various cases, it is more than puzzling why you did not find it appropriate to prosecute the corporations in question - in Case 4000 against Bezeq and its subsidiary 'Walla!' For bribery, and in the 2000 case against Yedioth Ahronoth for attempting to bribe. "

According to Dvorin, this is unusual in the light of the fact that this is an exception to the enforcement policy set by the state's attorney. Counsel number 9.15 of the attorney states that there is "... to be considered in any appropriate case, including the possibility of prosecution of the corporation, as well as the possibility of forfeiture." And "since the penalty is the main penalty for a corporation, the maximum fine for a corporation is twice the fixed fine for an individual."

Guided by Shai Nitzan

According to the directive, this is a punitive policy stemming from Israel's commitment under the OECD: "The need for stricter punishment, and in particular the penalties for corporations, has also risen from Israel's international commitments, and in particular the OECD's training to combat the bribery of foreign public servants. , The punishment for this offense must be daunting and effective. "

Another new directive issued by State Attorney Nitzan himself, but a month ago, "the prosecution's policy of prosecution and corporal punishment," states that "the starting point is that as long as there is a legal and evidentiary infrastructure to prosecute a corporation and there is a public interest in prosecuting the corporation, it must be prosecuted. It's not a difference between an individual and a corporation. "

Dvorin cites further evidence that the prosecution of the corporation is more important in some cases than the prosecution of the human defendants. Thus, for example, Justice D. Barak-Erez's judgment is stated: "Today, the principle of corporate criminal liability is an institutional element of our law ... The reasons for its recognition are primarily pragmatic - the centrality of corporations in economic activity and the fear of non-recognition of criminal liability of Corporations will allow felonies to be covered under the sealed screen of the corporate structure. "

Similarly, Judge A. Rubinstein wrote: "Organizational theory conviction is first and foremost intended to discourage specific society or its companies, from similar acts in the future, and therefore deterrence considerations should be given real importance."

Adv. Dvorin // Photo: Victor Olchowski

And so, too, Dvorin quotes Hadassah Bar-Mor's account of a corporation's criminal responsibility: "The corporation, as a viable entity, is a recognized entity in the law, is a citizen of the world community, and therefore must bear personal criminal responsibility in order to protect its interests. .. The prevention will therefore be done by imposing personal criminal responsibility on the corporation. "

Corporate responsibility

This is the case in many other cases. The most notable of them is the Holyland affair, which former prime minister Ehud Olmert is accused of - under which three economic companies named Holyland Tourism were indicted for Holyland Tourism and Holyland Park.

And so in the Siemens case, where in 2016 senior executives of the company and the electric company were charged with bribery offenses, and with them also the company itself, which paid a NIS 160 million fine with the state. And so in the Millersron affair, the company paid NIS 1.1 million in fines.

"The benefits they received from Mr. Netanyahu should have benefited directly from the corporations, and the corporations are also the ones who themselves provided and / or were supposed to bring the gift," writes Dvorin. The sympathetic coverage according to the alleged, so that the parent company will receive regulatory benefits. "

However, "in spite of all the foregoing, you found it appropriate not to prosecute the corporations in the aforementioned cases, although this was requested, you did not forfeit these corporations, and in fact chose to accuse only private persons and not the corporations that were an integral part of the offenses, as you claim in the allegations" .

In conclusion, Dvorin points out that "it is unnecessary to emphasize that the media bodies have tremendous power in relation to public servants and elected officials, and because of this, it is evident that in this case it was even more imperative to act in accordance with the instructions of the State Attorney and to comply with Iodine."

No flash, no news reports, and Mavala.