"1. The cross-examination of the state's witness Eran Malka will resume on June 29, 2017, and will continue continuously on the dates set at the time.
- A condition for the commencement of the cross-examination as aforesaid is the rendering of a decision by the panel that gave the decision of June 13, 2017, confirming that the accuser fully complied with the decision. To this end, the accuser will immediately apply for an appropriate application.
- If it is not possible to begin cross-examination of the state's witness on the date mentioned above – due to the delay attributed to the accuser – there will be room to consider canceling the indictment".
On June 25, 2017, the Department for the Investigation of Police submitted an appropriate request to Judge Mack-Kalmanovich. Despite this, I was not presented with a decision that is consistent with what is required by my said decision of June 21, 2017. Therefore, on June 28, 2017, I gave another decision in which I clarified that the accuser "to present by the beginning of Malka's cross-examination tomorrow, a decision that satisfies the above condition". This provision was not complied with; The hearing on June 29, 2017 was wasted to endless litigation regarding the implementation of the decision given in the proceeding under Article 74, instead of hearing the continuation of Malka's testimony; A suggestion I made during the hearing to move in the meantime to hear other witnesses was not helpful; And at the end of the hearing, I instructed the prosecution to turn to "Today" to Judge Mack-Kalmanovich in order to confirm the interpretation given by the prosecution to the decision of June 13, 2017.
The prosecution did indeed apply for clarification in the framework of the proceeding under Article 74. A hearing on the application was held on July 4, 2017. On July 9, 2017, Judge Mack-Kalmanovich issued another decision, in which she rejected the prosecution's interpretation of the lawsuit, and ruled that the prosecution was responsible for sorting and transferring the relevant material, which was not entitled to transfer the burden of sorting to the defense and to condition the copying of the material on a cumbersome and slow process of obtaining approval from the police, the Israel Bar Association, or the prosecution's representatives. As a result, Judge Mack-Kalmanovich gave supplementary instructions regarding the manner in which the material was sorted, transferred to the defense and the place where the examination was conducted.