- The foregoing shows that Ben-Eliezer harnessed his public status in support of the defendant's claim regarding his residency, and created an inseparable connection between his public activity as a minister in the Israeli government, and the circumstances of his acquaintance with the defendant and the defendant's contribution to the advancement of the interests of the State of Israel.
In this situation, it cannot be said that we are dealing with a "private" testimony given in favor of an "old friend", and a conclusion is required according to which the submission of the affidavit and the testimony in court should be regarded as actions that fall under the broad definition of "an action related to his position".
The Offense of Bribery - Summary
- Once it has been proven that an improper purpose was also at the basis of the transfer of the money to Ben-Eliezer, and that the action was carried out "in favor of an action related to Ben-Eliezer's position", it is necessary to conclude that the defendant should be convicted of the offense of bribery, according to Article 291 to the Penal Law.
- In the indictment, and in addition to the offense of bribery, the prosecution attributed to the defendant an offense of prohibition of money laundering, according to Section 3(a) to the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law.
According to the prosecution, and beyond the claim that the loan agreement should be viewed as a clear indication of the fact that it was bribery money, the defendant's action in creating the loan mechanism intended to conceal the fact that it was bribery money, constitutes an action with prohibited property as defined in the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law, since this was done in order to conceal or disguise the source of the money, the identity of the owners of the rights therein, and its location. its movements or taking action on it.
According to the defense, there is no basis for the claim that in drafting the loan agreement the defendant sought to conceal or disguise the fact that the funds were from a bribe, since the money was transferred from his private account to Ben-Eliezer's account openly.
- I have examined the arguments of the parties, and I believe that the prosecution has succeeded in proving that in addition to the offense of bribery, the defendant also committed the offense of money laundering, according to Section 3(a) to the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law. This determination is based on the combination of my factual determinations that were the basis for the defendant's conviction for the offense of bribery, and my factual determinations regarding the "loan agreement" and the gaps between it and reality.
Even if the bribe money was transferred openly, the very presentation of the bribe as a friendly loan only, while creating a loan mechanism that is ostensibly supported by a written agreement (which does not correspond to reality), should be regarded as data that satisfies the elements of the offense, and hence my incriminating conclusion.