Below, I will address the various questions that arise in the context of sentencing a corporation in Israeli law. My way of gearing will be like this: In the fifth chapter I will discuss the determination of the punishment area. In this framework, I will discuss the protected social value and the severity of the offense of which the defendants were convicted (chapter 5.1); Diagnose the severity of the offense
in its circumstances (chapter 5.2); I will discuss the customary and appropriate punishment in the circumstances of the case (chapter 5.3) and at the end I will determine the scope of the punishment in the case before me (chapter 5.4). In the sixth chapter, I will focus on the second stage of sentencing – an examination of the specific circumstances of the defendants and in this context their confession (chapter 6.1); the rehabilitation of the defendants before the sentencing, including the consideration of rehabilitation considerations in the corporations (chapter 6.2); the positive behavior of the defendant and the passage of time (chapter 6).3) In cooperation with the accuser (chapter 6.4). In the seventh chapter, I will discuss deterrence considerations that can also be taken into account in the framework of the second stage of determining the punishment within the punishment area, and especially on deterrence in economic offenses. In chapter 8, I will move on to discuss plea bargains. In this framework, I will discuss the rule that plea bargains must be respected (chapter 8.1) and the relationship between the punishment compound and the plea bargain (chapter 8.2); In chapter 8.3 I will discuss the sentencing in light of the plea bargain, and later on the question of whether a lenient plea bargain should be approved (chapter 8.3) I will discuss the difficulties in the plea bargain in the case before me (chapter 8.3) and finally in chapter 9 I will sentence the defendants.
- The first stage – determining the punishment area
Section 40B of the Penal Law states that the guiding principle in punishment is the principle of proportionality – an appropriate relationship between the severity of the offense in its circumstances, the degree of guilt of the accused, and the type and extent of the punishment imposed on him. This guiding principle includes two similar and related principles that are not identical: the principle of proportionality and the principle of retribution. As Kanai pointed out, the construction of the discretion, at p. 155, that: "the retributive consideration" is: "to impose a sentence that is appropriate to the severity of the offense... and expresses the disgust and disgust of society with the offense that was committed," and with it the demand of "the appropriateness... which originates mainly from the demands of justice and fairness" (see also Kogut, Hakak and Gilfish, The Structure of Punishment, at p. 270, and the references in Reference 4, as well as Yaniv Vaki and Yoram Rabin, "The Construction of Judicial Discretion in Punishment: A Picture of the Situation and Reflections for the Future", Hapraklit 52 413, 420-422 and the references in Judgment 24-28 (2014, hereinafter: Vaki Verbin, The Structure of Punishment).