It is not every day for us to predict the beginning of the persecution process, and this happens before our eyes to Justice Minister Amir Ohana. The minister wants to lead changes in the system, and this is responding with incredible speed.
In the past, they went to a bank employee or stock exchange member who allegedly violated the banking secrecy obligation and provided Ohana personal financial details, which apparently came to the De Marker newspaper. The paper, in turn, connected in a way that seemed puzzling, between Ohana's participation in 2013 in the issuance of Shufersal's bond (which was then controlled by Nochi Dankner), to the hearing of the Minister of Justice in granting Dankner amnesty.
We will explain. Dankner owned a private company called Ganden, which held IDB. Holdings, which it held on IDB. Development, which held Discount Investment, which held Shufersal. Some of these holdings were partial, so Dankner eventually held a small portion of Shufersal's stock, but the holding structure allowed him to control the company.
In 2013, Shufersal issued a bond issue. When there is an IPO, an investor is interested in joining his broker. In many cases, the broker appeals to the investor and offers to participate. The process is conducted between the investor and the broker. That's how the market works. Like arguing that every time you buy a Bisley or Bamba snack at a writer, a personal connection is created - not between you and the cashier, but between you and Dan Proper.
Let's go a long way and suppose that leading businessman Dankner and young lawyer Ohana did in 2013. So the allegation is that Dankner told Ohana: "Listen, I dreamed that one day I would be the Justice Minister and I would be pardoned, so let's attend the Shufersal Issue." Do you understand how far-fetched this sounds? And yet, Ohana received exactly the same benefit the other investors received in the offering. A penny no more. So what's the argument here?
De Marker had one last claim that they had already made in a previous article, according to which Ohana participated in the offering and received benefits from a qualified investor, although it was not. As a matter of fact, the paper does not claim that Ohana was unfit, but rather questioned. So consider the example you got into the grocery store and left with a loaf of bread in a bag. Someone came in front of you and claimed you might not have any money in your wallet, so you probably stole the bread. This is exactly the attitude towards Ohana. The paper adds that the test for a qualified customer is a wealth of at least NIS 12 million. That is, it is unlikely that the young lawyer has accumulated such an amount. What we forget to note is the fact that there were other options for being a qualified investor, for example, a combination of capital market knowledge and experience and activity to a certain minimum extent. And note the ending - no one, not even the newspaper, claims Ohana did not meet the criteria.
It was a lesson in the introduction to the persecution, first year. Even when there is nothing, things start to come out, generate volume, disperse accusations. Sometime something might catch on. That's how it starts.
Ohana wants to change the system and the hunting campaign against him has begun. They will not choose the means, the inventions, the misrepresentations and the lies, to take him away from his plans, or from the political system; Which comes first.
Erez Zadok is the CEO of Spring Fund ManagementFor more views of Erez Zadok