In his interrogation, Mualem reiterated that he had informed the plaintiffs about clause 15 of the lease contract (p. 2520, paras. 7-12; ibid., p. 2566, para. 14). He also claimed that the plaintiffs "knew very well that there was a lease contract" (ibid., at p. 2567, paras. 13-14; ibid., p. 2569, paras. 19-20), "because they read the lease contract" (ibid., p. 2567, paras. 16). In this context, Mualem further noted that as part of the proceeding, the plaintiffs attached various recordings, but surprisingly, none of the recordings were related to the relationship between them and him. According to him, if he had not informed the plaintiffs about clause 15 of the lease contract, one might have expected that one of them would have approached him and raised claims on the matter, while recording the conversations, and as he put it, "Sir morning and evening receives all kinds of new recordings here, he has not heard of any recording that I have been recorded that someone came to me, 'Zvika, why? Look what happened to me. Why didn't you warn me, why didn't you tell me Article 15? Do you know why there is no such recording? Because they are, because I warned them. If they had recorded me, 'But I told you,' then there would be no such recording. So your customers also cooperated with him" (ibid., p. 2533, paras. 4-11).
According to Mualem, the purchase of agricultural land at such a low price embodied at the time the existence of a chance to significantly improve the situation of the purchasers as opposed to the risk that the land would be taken back to the Administrator (ibid., at p. 2520, paras. 15-22; ibid., at p. 2521, paras. 1-14; p. 2568, paras. 20-23). Mualem also claimed that "they took the risk that they would receive handsome compensation, in case the manager took it they would receive handsome compensation. They had the member of Knesset who led them" (ibid., at p. 2522, paras. 12-14), and that the plaintiffs were of the opinion that they would be built from the return they would yield from the land if the designation were changed, or alternatively, from the compensation they would receive from the ILA (ibid., paras. 11-20; see also, ibid., at p. 2523, paras. 13-19).