2015-03-23 In criminal prosecutions related to government corruption, Israeli judges hide the records
According to Israeli law today, the public is entitled to access court decisions and judgments. In practice, the courts implemented an IT systems (including Net-HaMishpat) which are nothing short of a double book system. Such systems enable Judges to unlawfully grab the authority to hide court decisions and judgments on an arbitrary and capricious basis, creating false and misleading public record of the litigation. Moreover, the records, which are presented to the public, are often of dubious validity, and at times - clear fraud or perversion. What is a "Judgment" record was deliberately made ambiguous as well... In Nixon v Warner Communications, Inc (1978), the US Supreme Court reaffirmed the public right to access court records, stressing that it was critical in order to enable the public "to keep a watchful eye on government". Conduct of Israeli judges today unlawfully denies such public right. Moreover, in
Israel today, the public is denied the access to valid court records
showing what people were indicted for, what people were convicted of, and whether there was the lawful record for their imprisonment. Such conditions fit in military tribunals of a dictatorship, not in courts of a civil society. The unprecedented corruption of the courts over the past two decades has been central to corruption of government in general, accompanied by record levels of poverty.
Playing hide and seek with court records in criminal prosecutions, related to government corruption: Judge Ruth Lorch hides decisions in a case involving corruption in the Tax Authority and the Debtors' Courts; Judge David Rosen hides decision and judgments in the Holyland affair - bribing of former PM Ehud Olmert; Judge Yael Pradelesky hides decisions in the prosecution of Tax Authority whistle-blower Rafi Rotem.
_____
OccupyTLV, March 23 - Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) has filed a request for due process regarding his request to inspect court records in State of Israel v David Levy with Judge Ruth Lorch of the Center District Court. Today's request notes that the Requester is not permitted access to ascertain that his request was duly entered, is not permitted access to the parties presumed responses on his request to inspect, and is left uncertain that Judge Lorch's decision on his request to inspect would be publicly accessible or duly served... [1]
a) In State of Israel v David Levy - Judge Ruth Lorch is hiding court decisions in case related to two notoriously corrupt law enforcement agencies - the Tax Authority and the Debtors' Courts
Figure 1: March 23, 2015 State of Israel v David Levy: Decisions as shown in Net-HaMishpat public access system. The system shows only two decision - denying requests by two individuals to access the records in this case. In fact, the case on that day holds 21 decisions.
____
Net HaMishpat public access system showed on March 23, 2015 only two decision in State of Israel v David Levy. Both were Judge Lorch's decisions, denying public access to records in this case. In fact, the case on that day held 21 decisions. One of the individual, who had filed a previous request to inspect in this case, reported that neither party's responses, nor Judge Lorch's decisions on his request to inspect were duly served on him. Since the decision was also never posted in the public access system, he had no way to know the outcome of his request... [2]
b) In State of Israel v Rafi Rotem - Judge Yael Pradelsky is hiding court decisions in the prosecution of the Tax Authority whistle-blower
Judge Lorch is not alone in such practices. In the case of State of Israel v Rafi Rotem, the Tax Authority whistle-blower, Net-HaMishpat public access system showed on September 23, 2014 no decisions at all (today it shows one decision), while the courts access system showed 14 decisions.
a.
b.
Figure 2: September 23, 2014, List of Decisions in State of Israel v Rafi Rotem (1074-02-13): a. As it appears from a public access terminal of Net-HaMishpat (IT system of the court). No decisions are listed in this criminal prosecution, which commenced in February 2013. The screen says: "No details found". b. As it appears from the Clerk of the Court access terminal of Net-HaMishpat.
The Israeli courts created a double book system, where they routinely hide decisions from public access, although the law permits public access to court decisions that are not lawfully sealed.
____
In State of Israel v Rafi Rotem, Tax Authority Rafi Rotem is prosecuted for "insulting public service personnel". The prosecution come after a saga of over a decade, in which the state justice authorities refuse to investigate Rotem's complaints of rampant corruption in the Tax Authority, benefiting crime figures, tycoons, and those related to the ruling party. One of Rotem's complaints relates directly to current Prime Minister Netanyahu's involvement in a case of contraband electronics container, worth NIS millions in customs liability, and the subsequent murder of the intelligence "source" in the case. Over the same decade, Rotem was subjected to harsh retaliation by the same justice authorities, now prosecuting him, including demotion, firing from his job, a series of false arrests and beatings by police, for which no one was held accountable... The prosecution of the case itself involves obvious abuse as well. Over the past two years of the prosecution, a series of outside attorneys have appeared as false "public defenders" with no appointment records at all, and filed no motion or response papers, except for changing court hearing dates... [2a] The court file includes hyperlinks to seven (7) Israel Police investigation files, which are not accessible to the public or to the Defendant, while the Defendant in this case has not seen the full evidence for the past two years.
A request to inspect and to copy court records in former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's Holyland bribing case was recently filed with Judge David Rosen in former Prime Minister Olmert's bribing prosecution. The request pertained to duly executed Verdict and Sentence records of former PM Ehud Olmert and his secretary Shula Zaken. The records are not listed under decisions and/or judgments either the public access system, or the court's access system in Net-HaMishpat. [3]
Figure 3: The "Judgments" section in Net-HaMishpat -- IT system of the Israeli courts -- in State of Israel v Zerni et al, criminal prosecution of the Holyland corruption scandal. Three records appear in the list:
a) 2014-05-13 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Olmert and most other Defendants -- is an unsigned record, which is docketed as "Instruction to the Prison Authority to provide opinion re: Avraham Feiner".
b) 2014-06-09 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Avraham Feiner, which was separately rendered -- is docketed under "Judgments" as "Instruction to Supervisor of the Prison Authority to provide an updated opinion re: Avraham Feiner".
c) 2014-06-19 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Uri Lupoliansky, which was separately rendered -- is docketed under "Judgments" as "Sentencing by Judge David Rosen".
Nowhere to be found among public access records or court access records in this case is a valid record of verdict or sentencing for former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The "Decision" section in Net-Hamishpat public access system lists only 63 decision, most of the clearly invalid records - truncated or unsigned, and one clear forgery, while the court access system lists 523 decisions!
The Holyland corruption scandal originated in bribes taken by former PM Olmert. Israeli media reported a year ago that Olmert was convicted and sentence to a 6 year prison term, of which he hasn't served so far a day. Overnight, Judge David Rosen became a national hero in the war on government corruption. However, the Verdict and Sentence records are nowhere to be found... The case again demonstrates the fraud in design and operation of the Israeli courts IT system -- Net-HaMishpat. Corruption of the courts and the legal profession is a central cause of the socio-economic and political conditions in Israel today.
Page 1 Page 2
Figure 4: July 28, 2014 Forfeiture Decree on Shula Zaken, former Prime Minister Olmert's secretary, by Judge David Rosen is a clear case of forgery/perversion of a court record.
c) In State of Israel v Zerni et al - Judge David Rosen is hiding court decisions, verdicts and sentences in the prosecution of former Prime Minister Ehud Olmerts bribing...
a) 2014-05-13 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Olmert and most other Defendants -- is an unsigned record, which is docketed as "Instruction to the Prison Authority to provide opinion re: Avraham Feiner".
b) 2014-06-09 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Avraham Feiner, which was separately rendered -- is docketed under "Judgments" as "Instruction to Supervisor of the Prison Authority to provide an updated opinion re: Avraham Feiner".
c) 2014-06-19 Judge Rosen's Sentencing of Uri Lupoliansky, which was separately rendered -- is docketed under "Judgments" as "Sentencing by Judge David Rosen".
Nowhere to be found among public access records or court access records in this case is a valid record of verdict or sentencing for former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The "Decision" section in Net-Hamishpat public access system lists only 63 decision, most of the clearly invalid records - truncated or unsigned, and one clear forgery, while the court access system lists 523 decisions!
____
The Holyland corruption scandal originated in bribes taken by former PM Olmert. Israeli media reported a year ago that Olmert was convicted and sentence to a 6 year prison term, of which he hasn't served so far a day. Overnight, Judge David Rosen became a national hero in the war on government corruption. However, the Verdict and Sentence records are nowhere to be found... The case again demonstrates the fraud in design and operation of the Israeli courts IT system -- Net-HaMishpat. Corruption of the courts and the legal profession is a central cause of the socio-economic and political conditions in Israel today.
- Judge David Rosen July 28, 2014 "Levy Decree" on Shula Zaken, former Prime Minister Olmert's secretary is a hallmark of perversion/forgery
The two-page record in Figure 4, below, appears among public court records in Net-HaMishpat as "Form 13 - Shulamit Zaken, July 28, 2014, by David Rosen".
Figure 4: July 28, 2014 Forfeiture Decree on Shula Zaken, former Prime Minister Olmert's secretary, by Judge David Rosen is a clear case of forgery/perversion of a court record.
Left: July 28, 2014 Notice of Criminal Levy Decree - purported authentication of the purported Decree on the second page. The form, coforming to Regulations, requires the signature of the Magistrate of the Court. Instead, an upside down stamp (but no hand-signature) of Judge David Rosen was affixed.
Right: July 17, 2014 Levy Decree by Judge David Rosen: The record is comprised of:
a) July 17, 2014 Request for Rendering a Criminal Levy Decree by the State Prosecution - a scanned page of a paper record - . The request is based on: i. "April 31, 2014 Verdict" of Shula Zaken. There are no 31 days in the month of April, and there is no record among court file records in this case such as April 31, 2014 Verdict of Shula Zaken. A March 31, 2014 Verdict of Shula Zaken, which appears among Net-HaMishpat court records is an unsigned record, which fails to be listed among "Judgments" in this case. ii. May 15, 2014 Sentence of Shula Zaken, which certified the Plea Bargain Agreement between the State Prosecution and Zaken. The May 15, 2014 Sentence of Shula Zaken does not appear among public court decisions in this case, neither is it listed among "Judgments" in this case. The May 15, 2015 "Protocol" record, published by Haaretz daily in its report of the dramatic May 15, 2015 sentencing hearing is an unsigned court record, which ends with "Decision": "Decision in this matter will granted later today". [3b]
b) July 17, 2014 Post-it Decision by Judge David Rosen - an electronic record, suprerimposed on the Request page (rectangular frame), stating "Decree granted as requested". The Post-it Decision bears no visible signature of any type.
c) July 28, 2014 Certification: "True Copy of the Original" - a wet stamp (top, diagonally), which fails to state the name or authority of the signer, with a wet hand signature that appears a "Shatz" - not the name of the Chief Clerk of the Court, who is the person, authorized by law to certify court records. Forgery of "True Copy of the Original" certifications, which are mandated for execution of court decisions, is a widespread, common practice in the Israeli courts today.
The entire two page composite paper/electronic record was then scanned and entered into the system as an electronic record.
It should be noted that the record bears no signature of Judge David Rosen or any other court officer, whose name and authority is stated on the face of the record.
_____
The March 18, 2015 Decision says: [3+]
Therefore, it is impossible to grant instant Request.
The Decision in fact admits that there are no verdict or sentence records for either Olmert or Zaken registered in Net-HaMishpat system, neither an Arrest Decree for Zaken, who already served her prison term...
Conditions, where a court, which is electronically administered, lists a court file status as "Closed" without registration of the judgment records in its IT system, must be an indication of invalidity and lack of integrity in Net-HaMishpat system, as well as invalidity and lack of integrity in the records of the criminal prosecution of Olmert and Zaken. It must must raise serious concerns regarding the lawful foundation for Zaken's admission to prison.
- Judge Rosen's March 18, 2015 Decision on the request to inspect, in fact admits that no verdict or judgment for either Olmert or Zaken are registered among decisions or judgments in Net-HaMishpat.
The March 18, 2015 Decision says: [3+]
התיק בו מתבקש העיון נמצא פיזית בבית המשפט העליון, כחלק מהליכי ערעור על פסק הדין.
על כן, לא ניתן להיעתר לבקשה.
The court file, in which inspection was requested, is physically located in the Supreme Court, as part of appeal process on the judgment.Therefore, it is impossible to grant instant Request.
The Decision in fact admits that there are no verdict or sentence records for either Olmert or Zaken registered in Net-HaMishpat system, neither an Arrest Decree for Zaken, who already served her prison term...
Conditions, where a court, which is electronically administered, lists a court file status as "Closed" without registration of the judgment records in its IT system, must be an indication of invalidity and lack of integrity in Net-HaMishpat system, as well as invalidity and lack of integrity in the records of the criminal prosecution of Olmert and Zaken. It must must raise serious concerns regarding the lawful foundation for Zaken's admission to prison.
d) Israeli Supreme Court former Chief Justice Dorit Beinisch 2009 landmark decision on public access to court records, in conjunction with implementation of Net-HaMishpat IT-system, undermined the integrity of the Israeli courts
The petition, Civil Rights Association in Israel v Minister of Justice, which dragged in the Supreme Court for some 12 years, started even before the promulgation of the 2003 Regulations of the Courts - Inspection of Court Files. By the time the petition was finally decided, the implementation of Net-HaMishpat - IT systems of the courts - was in full progress. Accordingly, the Judgement specifically refers to the Regulations and to Net-HaMishpat a number of times. [3x]
- 2003 Regulations of the Courts - Inspection of Court Files
[3x1]
- 2009 - Justice Beinisch's Judgment in Association for Civil Rights in Israel v Minister of Justice
- That Net-HaMishpat would be a valid IT system in compliance with respective law, which in fact is not the case, and
- That the judges would abide by Regulation 2 (public access to Index of All Cases and unsealed decisions and judgments) and Regulation 3 (parties access to their own files), which in fact are not complied with today.
Instead, the petition focused on Regulation 4: The right of the public to access court records other than decisions and judgments. Of note, the Israel Bar Association objected to the public's right to access court records, as presented by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.
Regarding the right of the public to access decisions and judgments (Regulation 2), Justice Beinisch's writing presented the conditions, following the implementation of Net-HaMishpat as general public access to unsealed decisions and judgments is unlimited. [3x2] As shown here, that is not the case at all today...
As shown here, in fact, the situation today in the Israeli courts is far from public access to any person, anytime to decisions and judgments...
Regarding the right of a party to inspect his/her own court file (Regulation 3), Justice Beinisch wrote... [3x3]
The evidence in a number of cases shows that even such right is not complied with by the Israeli judges today. The remote access system in Net-HaMishpat does not enable parties, who are not attorneys, to access their respective court files, beyond the general public very limited access. Moreover, in all courts that have been inspected, except for the Tel-Aviv District Court, there are no terminals that enable direct access of parties to Net-HaMishpat court files. Regarding the public's right to access court records, beyond decisions and judgments, e.g., indictments (Regulation 4), Justice Beinisch's 2009 Judgment denied the petition, and accepted the position of the Minister of Justice and the Israel Bar Association in this matter. A justified request must be filed in order to access court records beyond decisions and judgments by non-parties. The justification was largely based on the "Right for Privacy". It should be noted, that effectively, Justice Beinisch's decision granted the "Right for Privacy" - a Civil Rights intended for persons, among others, to State agencies and corporations... It is the same outcome, in this respect, as the 2010 US Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, which provided Free Speech rights to corporations...
The evidence here shows that Israeli judges today do not comply with provisions of the Regulations, regarding the public's right to access the Index of All Cases as well as decisions and judgment that are not lawfully sealed. Worse yet, the implementation of Net-HaMishpat enabled the creation of a double- or triple-book system, where the public is misled to believe that is has access to the decisions and judgments. In fact, the decisions and judgments, which are presented in the public access section of Net-HaMishpat are an arbitrary and capricious selection by the judge, presiding in a given case. Moreover, is is obvious, as most clearly documented in the case of former PM Olmert, that Net-HaMishpat also enables Israeli judges to present the public with records that are often NOT authentic court records, and at times - blatantly perverted/forged court records.
With the passage of years, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and Attorney Dan Yakir will no doubt be remembered for their dozen year principled struggle for public access to court records in Israel. Likewise, the implementation of Net-HaMishpat and Presiding Justice Beinisch's ruling in this matter will no doubt be remembered as landmarks in undermining the integrity of the Israeli justice system.
e) Unlawful denial of public access and missing/perverted/forged court records - cardinal signs of judicial corruption, which enhances government corruption in general
The 2003 Regulations permit the Director of the Administration of the Courts to grant journalists and others general permit to access court records. However, the evidence here, particularly from the case of former PM Olmert, shows that given such unique access, journalists do not use a critical approach in their reporting on conduct of the courts.
Israeli media reports are typically based on pronouncements by judges in open court, with no supporting records. That, even after the Israeli Ombudsman of the Judiciary in his 2012 report documented that Israeli judges today do not consider their own pronouncements of decisions and judgments in open court binding.
US Nixon [3y]
United Nations reports on "Strengthening Judicial Integrity Against Corruption" note denial of public access to court records and missing court records as cardinal signs of judicial corruption. The same reports advocate the implementation of IT systems in the courts, as a means for increasing transparency of the judicial process and increasing public trust in the judiciary. [3z]
It appears that the UN conference participants never imagined IT systems of the Israeli type...
United Nations reports on "Strengthening Judicial Integrity Against Corruption" note denial of public access to court records and missing court records as cardinal signs of judicial corruption. The same reports advocate the implementation of IT systems in the courts, as a means for increasing transparency of the judicial process and increasing public trust in the judiciary. [3z]
It appears that the UN conference participants never imagined IT systems of the Israeli type...
f) Media are part of the problem
Israeli media reports are typically based on pronouncements by judges in open court, with no supporting records. That, even after the Israeli Ombudsman of the Judiciary in his 2012 report documented that Israeli judges today do not consider their own pronouncements of decisions and judgments in open court binding.
But even when records are available, it appears that Israeli media don't bother to establish the authenticity of records provided to them by the courts. For example, the May 15, 2014 sentencing of Shula Zaken, former Prime Minister Olmet's secretary, by Judge David Rosen, as part of the Holyland corruption trial plea bargain, was a major media event. The reputable Haaretz daily reported that Zaken was sentenced to an 11 month prison term. The report was supported by the publication of a complete court record of a "Protocol" and "Decision" of the same date. However, the record concludes with the "Decision": "Decision in this matter will be rendered later today." [3b] Moreover, the reporters should have noted that in this case, of the highest public policy significance, judgment records for Olmert and Zaken were missing in Net-HaMishpat.
g) In the Israeli courts today, what record is a "Judgment", is vague and ambiguous...
- In the 2012 annual report, the Ombudsman of the Judiciary documents that Israeli judges today do no longer hold the pronouncement in open court of decisions or judgments binding. [3c]
- In a 2014 Supreme Court decision, Justice Noam Solberg again pronounced that one can't tell what is a judgment in the Israeli courts by the court record's title. [4]
- In response to a recent Freedom of Information request, the Administration of Courts refused to answer: [5]
-- Does the registration of a "Judgment" record under the "Judgments" tab in Net-HaMishpat indicate that it is indeed a "Judgment"?
In most jurisdictions, where the courts originate in the English common law (as is the case in Israel), there was a "Book of Judgments", which were one of the fundamental "Books of Courts" - today often replaced by a "Judgment Index". Furthermore, given the overriding significance of identifying the Judgment records and their due processing, a special procedure, such as "Notice of Entry of Judgment", issued by the Clerk of the Court, was mandated by law.
A court system, where one cannot ascertain what record is the "judgment" in any given court file, must be considered ludicrous...
A court system, where one cannot ascertain what record is the "judgment" in any given court file, must be considered ludicrous...
h) Court corruption is tightly linked to general public corruption and rapid increase in poverty
United Nations reports on "Strengthening Judicial Integrity Against Corruption" also note the links between judicial corruption, the persecution of whistle-blowers, and general public corruption:
United Nations reports on "Strengthening Judicial Integrity Against Corruption" also note the links between judicial corruption, the persecution of whistle-blowers, and general public corruption:
"Factors which engender judicial abuse
of power also create an environment where whistle blowing is
unlikely, given the extensive power and authority of the individuals
involved. The lack of transparency and the absence of comprehensive
and regularly updated databases further worsen the effects of
corruption in the judiciary. Such situations easily lend themselves
to inconsistencies in the application of the law and make it much
more difficult to identify patterns, trends or individual cases in
which incorrect or anomalous results suggest the possibility of
corruption." [5a]
The 2013 Human Rights Report of the UN Human Rights Council on Israel incorporated the Human Rights Alert submission with the note: "Lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the District Courts, and the Detainees courts in Israel". [6] The submission documented the implementation of fraudulent IT systems in the Israeli courts over the past decade.
The same period was marked by unprecedented swell in corruption of government and the justice system, [7] including evidence of corruption directly linked to Prime Minister Netanyahu, which justice agencies refuse to investigate. [8] In February 2015, an OECD delegation arrived in Israel to investigate performance of government, justice, and media in Israel, relative to Israel's compliance with the "OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials". [9]
The same period was also marked by an unprecedented increase in poverty, which propelled Israel to first place in poverty among OECD nations. [10]
An academic paper, titled "Fraudulent new IT systems of the Israeli courts - unannounced regime change?" was accepted for publication and presentation, following international, anonymous peer-review in ECEG 2015 - an upcoming international computer science conference on government IT systems. [11]
Conclusion
In Israel today:
The 2013 Human Rights Report of the UN Human Rights Council on Israel incorporated the Human Rights Alert submission with the note: "Lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the District Courts, and the Detainees courts in Israel". [6] The submission documented the implementation of fraudulent IT systems in the Israeli courts over the past decade.
The same period was marked by unprecedented swell in corruption of government and the justice system, [7] including evidence of corruption directly linked to Prime Minister Netanyahu, which justice agencies refuse to investigate. [8] In February 2015, an OECD delegation arrived in Israel to investigate performance of government, justice, and media in Israel, relative to Israel's compliance with the "OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials". [9]
The same period was also marked by an unprecedented increase in poverty, which propelled Israel to first place in poverty among OECD nations. [10]
An academic paper, titled "Fraudulent new IT systems of the Israeli courts - unannounced regime change?" was accepted for publication and presentation, following international, anonymous peer-review in ECEG 2015 - an upcoming international computer science conference on government IT systems. [11]
Conclusion
In Israel today:
- The public is presented with false and misleading, selective access to court records, particularly in criminal prosecutions related to government corruption.
- The implementation of fraudulent IT-systems in the courts, including but not limited to Net-HaMishpat, and the landmark ruling of former Presiding Justice Beinisch on public access to court records opened the way for abuse by judges, who unlawfully hide court records.
- Media are provided preferential access to court records, but fails to report on obvious aberrations in court records.
- Conditions have been established over the past decade, where the public is denied the access to valid court records showing what people were indicted for, what people were convicted of, and whether lawful records exist for their imprisonment. Such conditions fit in military tribunals of a dictatorship.
- Conditions which prevail today in the Israeli courts, should be deemed serious violation of the Human Rights of the people of the State of Israel by the State justice system.
- Corruption of the courts and the legal profession is a central cause of socio-economic and political conditions in Israel today.
LINKS:
[1] 2015-03-22
State of Israel v David Levy (42814-10-14) - Dr Zernik's
Request for Due Process, in re: February 28, 2014 Request to Inspect
//
מדינת
ישראל נ דוד לוי (42814-10-14)
– בקשתו
של דר'
יוסף
צרניק להליך הוגן בנידון בקשה לעיון מיום
28
לפברואר,
2015
[2] 0000-00-00
State of Israel v David Levy (42814-10-14) in the Lydia-Center
District Court – Index of Records //
מדינת
ישראל נ דוד לוי (42814-10-14)
בבית
המשפט המחוזי מרכז-לוד:
רשימת
כתבים וקישורים
[3] Olmert index [3+] 2015-03-21 Holyland II: Where are Judge Rosen's Verdict and Sentence records of former PM Olmert corruption?_OpEdNews.com
[3x] 2009-10-08 Association for Civil Rights in Israel v Minister of Justice et al ( 5917/97) Chief Justice Dorit Beinish: The new case management system (Net Ha-Mishpat) would require restricting public access to court records _ Globes (Heb + Eng)
בג"צ 5917/97 האגודה לזכויות האזרח בישראל נ' שר המשפטים (פס"ד מיום 8.10.09) (זכות העיון בתיקי בימ"ש).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/50621508/
[3x1]
[3x2]
[3x3]
:
[3z]
[3b] 2014-05-15 Revital Hovel: "Judge Rosen adopted the plea bargain with Shula Zaken. After she detailed the affair in a dramatic testimony, the Judge approved the plea bargain agreement between the State Prosecution and Zaekn, according to which she will serve an 11 month prison term"_Haaretz[3x1]
2. עיון הציבור ברשימת המשפטים
(א) כל אדם רשאי לעיין ברשימת המשפטים שבמזכירות בית המשפט;
(ב) כל אדם רשאי לעיין בהחלטות שאינן אסורות לפרסום על פי דין.
3. זכות עיון של בעלי הדין
בעל דין רשאי, לאחר שמילא הודעת עיון לפי טופס 1 שבתוספת (להלן - הודעת עיון), לעיין בתיק בית המשפט שהוא צד בו, אלא אם כן הוא אסור לעיונו על פי דין.
4. זכות העיון של מי שאינו בעל דין
(א) כל אדם רשאי לבקש מבית משפט לעיין בתיק בית משפט (להלן - בקשת עיון), ובלבד שהעיון בו אינו אסור על פי דין.
(ב) בקשת עיון תוגש לשופט או רשם שהתיק נדון לפניו, ובאין אפשרות כאמור, לשופט או רשם שיקבע נשיא בית המשפט.
(ג) בקשת עיון תהיה מנומקת, ותוגש לפי טופס 2 שבתוספת.
(א) כל אדם רשאי לעיין ברשימת המשפטים שבמזכירות בית המשפט;
(ב) כל אדם רשאי לעיין בהחלטות שאינן אסורות לפרסום על פי דין.
3. זכות עיון של בעלי הדין
בעל דין רשאי, לאחר שמילא הודעת עיון לפי טופס 1 שבתוספת (להלן - הודעת עיון), לעיין בתיק בית המשפט שהוא צד בו, אלא אם כן הוא אסור לעיונו על פי דין.
4. זכות העיון של מי שאינו בעל דין
(א) כל אדם רשאי לבקש מבית משפט לעיין בתיק בית משפט (להלן - בקשת עיון), ובלבד שהעיון בו אינו אסור על פי דין.
(ב) בקשת עיון תוגש לשופט או רשם שהתיק נדון לפניו, ובאין אפשרות כאמור, לשופט או רשם שיקבע נשיא בית המשפט.
(ג) בקשת עיון תהיה מנומקת, ותוגש לפי טופס 2 שבתוספת.
2. Public access to Index of All Cases
(a) Any person is permitted to inspect the Index of All Cases, which is located in the Office of the Clerk.
(b) Any person is permitted to inspect decisions that are not lawfully sealed.
3. Access by parties
A
party to a case is permitted, once he/she completed the Notice of
Inspection... to inspect the court file to which he/she is a party,
unless lawfully prohibited for his/her inspection.
4. Access by non-parties
(a) Any person is permitted to request the court to inspect a court file, unless lawfully sealed.
(b)
Request to inspect may be filed with the judge or magistrate, who is
presiding in the case, otherwise - will be assigned to a judge or a
magistrate by the Presiding Judge of the Court.
(c) A request to inspect shall be justified...
[3x2]
תקנה
2(ב) מרחיבה את זכות העיון של הציבור ללא כל צורך בהגשת בקשה לבית המשפט,
אולם זאת רק לגבי החלטות של בית המשפט, ורק לגבי אלה שאינן אסורות לפרסום
על פי דין... כיום מתפרסמים רוב פסקי הדין וההחלטות
של בתי המשפט השונים באתר האינטרנט של הרשות השופטת, כך שהם פתוחים
לעיונו של כל אדם באופן שוטף...
Regulation
2(b) broadens the public's right to access court records, requiring no
filing of a request to inspect, but only relative to court decisions,
and only relative to such that are not lawfully sealed... Today most
decisions and judgments of the various courts are published in the
Internet site of the Judicial Authority, and therefore are open for
inspection of any person, anytime...
[3x3]
:
בעל דין בהליך אינו נדרש להגיש בקשת עיון, ודי שיגיש הודעת עיון על-מנת שיורשה לעיין בתיק, אלא אם העיון אסור על-פי דין.
A
party to a case is not required to file a request to inspect; it is
sufficient that he/she file a notice of inspection in order to be
permitted inspection of the court file, unless prohibited by law.
[3y][3z]
השופט רוזן אימץ את הסדר הטיעון עם שולה זקן
לאחר שגוללה את פרטי הפרשה בעדות דרמטית, השופט אישר את הסדר הטיעון בין הפרקליטות לזקן, לפיו תרצה 11 חודשי מאסר
http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/law/1.2321711[3c] Judiciary ombudsman
[4] 2014-10-30 Judgment in Aviva Brauda v Gadi Ferber (3233/14) in the Israeli Supreme Court, Justice Noam Solberg: "Distinction whether a judicial record is a "Judgment", "other decision", is not necessarily made, as is well established, based on its title..."
[5] 2015-01-04 FOIA Request on the Administration of Courts ( פ - 7/2015) RE: IT system Net-HaMishpat
https://www.scribd.com/doc/256375395/
2015-03-04 FOIA Response by the Administration of Courts ( פ - 7/2015) RE: IT system Net-HaMishpat -- no records available
2015-03-04 FOIA Response by the Administration of Courts ( פ - 7/2015) RE: IT system Net-HaMishpat -- no records available
[6] 2013-01-01 The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission, as incorporated into the UN Human Rights Council UPR report with the note "Lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees courts in Israel" (page 4, paragraph 25)
The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission (2013) for the Universal Periodic Review of israel by the UN Human Rights Council, as it appears on the UN web site
http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session15/IL/HRA_UPR_ISR_S15_2012_HumanRightsAlert_E.pdf
[7] 2013-09-07 Israel among most corrupt of OECD countries_Jerusalem Post
2014-05-17 ISRAEL: Tel-Aviv courtroom drama exposes new evidence of organized crime in highest levels of government in Israel
2014-02-27 ISRAEL: War hero Moti Ashkenazi+76 others versus the medieval debtors' courts_OpEdNews.com
2014-01-03 ISRAEL: Large-scale Fraud in the Supreme Court's Office of the Clerk
[8] 2014-11-09 Israeli Ombudsman refuses to accept whistle-blower complaint against PM Netanyahu - smuggling, murder of a "source"_OpEdNews.com
[9] 2015-02-01 OECD examines performance of government in Israel - the justice system and media - in bribing and corruption affairs - compliance with the Convention on Combating Bribery [Hebrew only]
[10] 2014-04-16 Startup Israel Suffering Most OECD Poverty as Poor Surge_Bloomberg
[11] 2015-01-10 Zernik, J. "Fraudulent New IT Systems of the Israeli Courts - Unannounced Regime Change? " ECEG 2015 - in press
https://www.scribd.com/doc/252258857/
____
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
OccupyTLV
____
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations was incorporated into the 2010 Periodic Review Report regarding Human Rights in the United States, with the note: "corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California".
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations was incorporated into the 2013 Periodic Review Report regarding Human Rights in Israel, with the note: "lack of integrity of the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees courts in Israel."
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council for the 2015 Periodic Review of Human Rights in the US is titled: "Large-scale fraud in IT systems of the US federal courts: Unannounced regime change?" to be reviewed May 2015.
____
Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
OccupyTLV
____
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations was incorporated into the 2010 Periodic Review Report regarding Human Rights in the United States, with the note: "corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California".
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations was incorporated into the 2013 Periodic Review Report regarding Human Rights in Israel, with the note: "lack of integrity of the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees courts in Israel."
* The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the Human Rights Council for the 2015 Periodic Review of Human Rights in the US is titled: "Large-scale fraud in IT systems of the US federal courts: Unannounced regime change?" to be reviewed May 2015.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome... especially any tips regarding corruption of the courts in Los Angeles. Anonymous tips are fine. One simple way to do it is from internet cafes, etc.