Regarding the severity of the acts, it is necessary to take into account whether the offense was planned in advance. The more a planned offense is, the more severe it becomes, because its commission cannot be attributed to a momentary inclination or temptation. In the case before me, as appears from the facts of the amended indictment, the false reports made by the defendants as a result of the acts of the organs in them, in particular, as stated in the indictment, defendants 1 and 2 (who deny, as aforesaid, the charges against them), were carried out with great sophistication, in various ways and over many years, and were carefully planned.
5.2.2. The damage caused by the commission of the offense (section 40T(a)(4)
The more damage from the commission of the offense increases, the more serious the offense is. In the framework of the proceeding before me, it was claimed that the damage was to mislead investors in the amount of tens of millions of shekels.
5.2.3. The reasons that led the defendants to commit the offense (section 40T(a)(5)
The reasons that led a defendant to commit an offense are also important for determining its severity. After all, an offense committed out of necessity (stealing food) is not an offense committed for the sake of money. The acts were committed and the offenses were committed only out of greed for money. However, in this case, as the defendants' counsel noted, it is a matter of greed on the part of the officers, and perhaps this can also be attributed to Africa Industries, since it benefited from the rise in share prices and the raising of capital. The defendants did not act out of greed for money, nor did they derive any benefit from the offenses. Therefore, they should not be attributed severity in this circumstance, although there is no dispute that the basis for the commission of the offenses by the human defendants, especially the main defendants, was greed for money.
5.2.4 Being Defendants Corporations
This circumstance does not appear in the context of the circumstances of the commission of the offense, but it is also appropriate to consider it as a relevant circumstance for determining the penalty range (section 401b of the Penal Law states that the list in section 40T is an open list and that the court is authorized to consider additional circumstances related to the commission of the offense in order to determine the appropriate penalty range). I am of the opinion that the commission of offenses by a corporation of false and misleading reports, with the aim of misleading investors, constitutes an aggravating circumstance in the circumstances of the commission of the offense. Corporations in general, and public corporations in particular, benefit when their share prices rise, and they benefit from investors' confidence in the capital market, and the possibility of raising capital at attractive prices. An attempt to influence this trust through fraudulent means, false records, and misleading details is extremely serious. This is because offenses of this kind are very difficult to detect, as the case before me attests.