The attorneys of Iris and Shaul Alovich protested the conduct of the media and the court • "We are petitioning for the prosecution to warn witnesses that they should not be interviewed"

• Shaul Alovitch in court // Photo: Oren Ben Hakon

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial has already been opened and allegations have already been made regarding the conduct of the media, the court and the prosecutor's office. 

The attorneys of the Iris and Shaul Alovich, suspects in the $ 3,000 case, demanded that the court prohibit witnesses in the case from interviewing the media, thereby affecting the outside court process. 

Saul Alovic's attorney, attorney Jacques Chen, argued in the hearing: "This is a mega case. The prosecution has been working on the case for two and a half years and sells the case to Borio. This is a criminal procedure and there should be no surprises. Our request is to ensure due process. On Thursday, at least three key witnesses were interviewed on a television show. There was no such thing. It has nothing to do with communication nor what it has done. We want to conduct the trial here, and the court will also not allow the trial to be conducted in the media, and still try to bring a witness back to it from his testimony. "

"We asked the Supreme Court to intervene before committing this thing, which is an offense, but he replied that he would not intervene, so we have no choice but to petition the court to warn its witnesses that they should not be interviewed. This is the only way to ensure there is a justice and fair trial here and justice is published." "As a result, the prosecution agreed to call the witnesses as stated, and the court noted in its decision that it recorded the prosecution's commitment to do so," Chen added. 

The lawyer for Iris Eloovic, Attorney Michal Rosen Ozer said: "Transition to speed is important to fairness. It's not one at the expense of the other. It's not a rope game. The existence of due process is part of the public interest. We are seeking to give the court tools to understand the scope of work and difficulties we are facing. This bag is a mega bag. Not only is it huge in scope, but uniquely every document in it is substantial. " 

"We cannot accept a situation where when we request a hearing extension we reject our application on the grounds that this is not a trial, and when we come to trial we are told that we already have time for a hearing. Preparing a defense requires time. In this case, beyond the scope of the material, we already know that we have a material dispute regarding unpublished documents. We have, for example, records from conversations with state witnesses, so our request is to set a reminder that we will then be able to better estimate the amount of time needed, "Rosen said.