The Prosecutor's Office filed a decision with the Tel Aviv District Court: "Review of the evidence shows that there is a good evidentiary infrastructure underpinning the orders."

• Jonathan Orich and Ofer Golan // Photo: Yossi Zeliger, Coco

The State Appealed to the Tel Aviv District Court to Appeal for a Peace Court Decision (Justice Masarwa), Rejecting Police Request to Receive Penetration of Computer Matter for the Cell Phones of Prime Minister Adonis Orich, Yossi Shalom, and Israel Einhorn, Investigated At the State of Harassment incident in Case 4000, Shlomo Pilber, and approved a search warrant only in relation to Ofer Golan.

Netanyahu's Advisor at the Entrance to the DIP: "This is a Political Inquiry to Isolate the Prime Minister" // Photo: Moshe Ben Simhon

Recall, the Supreme Court directed the Magistrate's Court to re-examine the effect of early search results, which it ruled were invalid, on the existence or absence of sufficient evidentiary basis for obtaining cellular phone penetration orders from four of the suspects involved in the incident. The Peace Q ruled that the test to be applied is twofold: both an objective test, focused on the existence of sufficient "clean" evidence to issue the penetration orders, and a subjective test, seeking to examine the causal relationship between the defective products and the decision of the investigating unit to decide For issuing penetration orders.

Justice Masarwa ruled that, even without the defective search results, there is a good evidentiary infrastructure that allows for the issuance of penetration orders for the cell phones of the three respondents and Ofer Golan, but the combination of the subjective test leads to the conclusion that the application should be rejected in relation to your reasons, .

The state appeal, filed by the State Department's Cyber ​​Department Attorney, Dr. Haim Mizunsky, stated that while the Magistrate's Court found that the review of the evidence clearly indicates that even without the search results for which it was determined that there were defects, a good evidentiary infrastructure exists The orders at the time of filing - he had to approve the requested penetration orders. This is in accordance with Judge Elron's decision.

The State believes that the Magistrate's Court misinterpreted the said Supreme Court decision in a manner that led to the conclusion of the rejection of the application. According to the State, on the basis of an objective test focused on the possibility of obtaining the requested penetration orders on the basis of the "clean" evidence, which is separated from the evidence that he found to be inadmissibly invalid, instead of the combined test - the objective and the subjective - that he will apply at the Peace Court.