Criminal Case (Jerusalem) 28759-05-15 State of Israel v. Eran Malka - part 34

(d)        Criminal Case (Central District) 74249-12-19 State of Israel v. Nissani (September 12, 2022) - The defendant worked as a supervisor in the District Planning and Building Committee, and after completing his work there, he worked to promote the affairs of various applicants before the committee.  According to his confession, as part of a plea bargain, he was convicted of three offenses of bribery brokerage and aiding and abetting the receipt of bribes.  A lawyer who deals with real estate matters transferred the sum of NIS 60,000 to the defendant on two occasions each time, in order for the defendant to transfer the money to a functionary on the committee in exchange for the defendant acting to reduce the betterment levies imposed on the lawyer's clients.  In another case, the defendant contacted an official in the committee and acted to transfer NIS 50,000 to him in order to handle another client of the lawyer.  In the fourth case, the defendant received a sum of NIS 17,000 from a person who was charged a betterment levy, and agreed with the committee employee that she would change the records in favor of that person in exchange for NIS 5,000.  In the plea bargain, it was agreed that the prosecution would petition for a proper sentence of 16 months in prison, while the defense would be free in its arguments.  The court ruled that the appropriate punishment for the defendant's actions begins, even at the lower level, from an actual period of imprisonment behind bars.  However, Kola deviated from the compound, and set the appropriate sentence at 9 months to be served with community service.  The reason given for this is the decisive weight of the rehabilitation considerations over the considerations of retribution and deterrence, in light of the defendant's exceptional personal circumstances and the many significant rehabilitation proceedings in which he took part over the years.  This is in addition to the fact that he confessed to the charges against him, took responsibility, and the offenses of which he was convicted had passed six years or more before the sentence was handed down.  It was also noted that the punishment imposed was consistent with the sentences imposed (in a different proceeding) on the committee employee and the lawyer, whose actions were slightly less severe than the severity of their actions.