A kind of "probation officers" for corporations (see, for example, Richard S. Gruner, "Beyond Fines: Innovative Corporate Sentences under Federal Sentencing Guidelines", 71 Wash. U. L. Q. 261, 305-306 (1993); Christopher A. Wray, "Corporate Probation under the New Organizational Sentencing Guidelines", 101 Yale L. J. 2017, 2039 (1992), and Assaf Eckstein, "On Agreed Arrangements and the Appointment of a Supervisor as a Substitute for Criminal Enforcement Against Corporations," Tel Aviv University Corporate Governance website (March 16, 2017), available at:
http://www7.tau.ac.il/blogs/law/2017/03/16/1945/
I have briefly presented the accepted options for punishing corporations, in order to show that it is possible to determine a variety of penalties in relation to corporations as well. However, I do not elaborate on this matter, since in Israeli law these solutions are not possible at this stage, until the law is amended. The Supreme Court, in an expanded panel (inCrim. Crim. 8062/12 State of Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection v. Israel Ports Development and Properties Company Ltd. (published in Nevo, 2015, hereinafter: the Israel Ports case), addressed the question of whether it is possible to apply a penalty of probation and supervision of a probation officer as well as work for the benefit of the public on corporations, by virtue of the existing provisions of the law, and ruled that it is not possible to add types of punishment to corporations by way of interpretation. The legislature must deal with the matter to the extent that it finds room for it. In the case of Israel Ports, the question of what penalty can be imposed on a corporation that has been decided not to convict it, whether it can be obligated to refrain from an offense, and whether a probation order is required for this purpose. In the same matter, a majority opinion was held (President A. Grunis and the Honorable Justices Salim Jubran, Yitzhak Amit, Esther Hayut and Hanan Meltzer) that while it is possible not to convict a corporation of criminal offenses even though it has confessed to committing the offense (in the same matter as the pollution of the sea), and it is possible to impose an undertaking to refrain from committing an offense, it cannot be subject to a probation order or public service. The court further ruled that the task of designing the appropriate punishment mechanisms for corporations within the framework of criminal law should be left to the legislature, since these are moral decisions regarding the proper approach to punishing corporations, and this involves significant operational and budgetary aspects. The Honorable President Asher Grunis held, in paragraph 34 of his judgment that: