See also in this regard the Bakmotsky ruling: Crim. Appeal 532/71 Eliyahu Bahmotsky v. State of Israel, IsrSC 26 (1) 543). In HCJ 5699/07 Anonymous A. v. the Attorney General (published in Nevo, 2008, para. 49, regarding the plea bargain in the case of former President Moshe Katzav), an approach was established that limits the court's intervention in the prosecution's discretion in plea bargains to exceptional and rare cases only (see paragraphs 10-12 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice Ayala Procaccia and paragraph 11 of the judgment of the Honorable President Dorit Beinisch). See also HCJ 3036/10 Achiya Nagar v. State Attorney's Office (published in Nevo, 2010), paragraph 38 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice Yoram Danziger, hereinafter: the Nagar case). In HCJ 1560/12 Yair Shlomo Deikan v. State Attorney's Office (published in Nevo, 2012), the Honorable Judge, today the Honorable President Esther Hayut commented on the limited cases in which the court will intervene in the prosecution's considerations regarding a plea bargain (in paragraph 6 of her judgment):
"As a rule, the High Court of Justice does not intervene in the prosecution's considerations regarding the prosecution or its considerations regarding the preparation of plea bargains, with the exception of rare cases in which there were material flaws in the decision of the prosecuting authorities that are inconsistent with the principles of administrative law.... In this context, the authority's duty to act fairly and in good faith is examined, inter alia; its duty to consider only relevant considerations; and the reasonableness of the decision within the framework of the broad range of professional judgment given to the enforcement agencies."
Thus, in the case of the Movement for Quality Government in the Rabbi Pinto case, it was stated: "It is not easy for the court to deviate from the agreements of the parties that have been formed into a plea bargain" (see also: Crim. Crim. 3068/10 Anonymous v. State of Israel (published in Nevo, 2010) and Crim. Appeal 7757/11 Anonymous v. State of Israel (published in Nevo, 2013). In the Metzger case, the Supreme Court reiterated the same principle and held as follows (in paragraph 11 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice Uzi Fogelman):