Criminal Case (Haifa) 44064-11-20 State of Israel v. Shakib Abu Rukun - part 34

Jamal sought to oblige the defendant to pay him the sum of ILS 631,018, consisting of salary expenses in the sum of ILS 44,550, the tax difference paid by him for filing a false report in the sum of ILS 386,468, and the sum of ILS 200,000 due to the mental anguish caused to him.  He further claimed that the defendant's behavior and repeated false harassment on his part caused him to file an application against him for an order to prevent threatening harassment.

In his testimony before me, on December 2, 2025, Jamal further claimed that the defendant had caused him a lot of damages, that he had served as his lawyer at certain stages, had done things behind his back, stole land from him, falsified reports to the Land Tax Authority, and that his actions had caused him heavy expenses, including legal expenses, and mental anguish when he conducted legal proceedings for about five years.  According to him, the defendant did not return his money to him, tried to reach an agreement with him, which in the end did not succeed.

1. Louis Kayuf - the victim of the offense that is the subject of the ninth indictment in the main case. He testified before me on December 2, 2025 and claimed that to this day the defendant has not returned his money to him. He filed a complaint with the police but did not file a civil lawsuit.  He noted that he and his brother were supposed to receive 3 dunams of land, and that all he wanted was to receive "his land." He noted that in the end, he and his brother received 2,800 square meters, 200 square meters less than the land they deserve.  He also claimed that his actions caused a long-standing dispute between neighbors.

• Fadi al-Amir al-Tayyr - the victim of the offense that is the subject of the ninth indictment in the main case. He testified before me on December 2, 2025 and claimed that the defendant who represented him in the real estate transaction was supposed to issue him a title deed in which 7 dunams were registered in his name.  Later he realized that he had registered only 6,200 square meters in his name.  When he himself issued a title deed, he realized that the defendant had deceived him and did not transfer the entire land in his name, but rather registered the rights to other people, including his wife.  He also noted that the defendant had cut off contact with him and was not available for him.

According to him, in addition to the land that the defendant had deprived of 800 square meters, additional expenses were added due to taking a loan from the bank.  He purchased the land for his family and children.  He asked for the land to be returned to him, i.e., his share of the rights.  According to him, he has suffered a lot of economic damage, and his main request is to restore the rights and ownership of the land to which he is entitled.  He noted that he tried to contact the defendant and reach agreements with him, but this was unsuccessful.

• Abu Mufleh Majdi - the victim of the offense that is the subject of the tenth indictment in the main case. An "affidavit of acceptance without consideration" was submitted in his case, with consent, through Adv. Tayseer Hasson, which was marked H/5.  In his framework, he noted that there is no demand and/or claim and/or claim whatsoever against the defendant and that he is not asking for any compensation.  At the end of his affidavit, he praised the defendant's work and claimed that he handled real estate transactions for him with great professionalism and asked that this be taken into account and that his sentence be reduced.

6. Amer Makleda - the victim of the offense that is the subject of the twelfth indictment in the main case. An "affidavit of receipt without consideration" was submitted in his case, with consent, through Attorney Tayseer Hasson, which was marked H/6. In the affidavit, he noted that the defendant had returned the money he had paid him and that there was no demand and/or claim and/or claim against him and that he was not asking for any compensation.  At the end of his affidavit, he praised the defendant's work and claimed that he was a well-known figure in the settlements of Isfiya and Daliyat al-Carmel, served as a council member and was a social activist for needy families.  He also noted his contribution to the promotion of culture and sports in Isfiya.  He asked that this be taken into account and that his sentence be reduced.
7. Baha Kayuf - the victim of the offense that is the subject of the first indictment in the attached file. An affidavit was filed in his case with the consent of the parties, marked H/9.  As part of his affidavit, he shared that he wanted to sue the defendant in the amount of ILS 10,000 plus VAT.  He asked to restore the registration of the property in his name.  He contacted a lawyer to return the plot in his name and his answer was that it was a re-registration process.  The defendant caused him damage and forged his signature on a sale agreement.  Baha attached a confirmation of the registration of a warning note in the defendant's name at the Land Registry Office and the forged sale agreement, including his signature.
8. The affidavits of some of the victims of the offense and the testimony of some of them before me strengthen my impression of the great damage caused by the defendant as a result of the many fraudulent acts he committed. The defendant had no mercy for the victims of the offense, some of whom were his neighbors and acquaintances and some of whom were hard-working people who gave him the best of their money and were left without money and without real estate.  Thus, for example, Fatma, a hard-working woman who saved her money with great effort in order to purchase a plot of land for her only son, so that he could build his house, and at the end of the day, received back only a small sum of her money (a sum of ILS 80,000 - see paragraph 28B of the accuser's written arguments) through execution proceedings.  The defendant located lands belonging to people living abroad and found, among other things, that of Mr. Beckman, an 80-year-old man, who was forced to come to Israel in order to conduct proceedings against the defendant in order to restore ownership of the land in his name, and described to me the financial and emotional damages caused to him as a result.  Crime victims also testified before me that they paid the best of their money for real estate that was not transferred in their name in their entirety, and the defendant registered them in the name of his wife and father's cousin, and even wrote a warning note in his name on other and additional real estate.

The Customary Punishment Policy

79. As for the customary punitive policy , I will note that in general, the trend is to impose imprisonment for fraudulent offenses. It has often been held that the fact that the offenses have an economic hue does not reduce their severity, and the opposite is true.  We are dealing with someone who tried to make a small profit, while stealing the money of others, and in such cases the punishment must include a component of actual imprisonment, in the sense of "the sinner does not get rewarded." In this context, it was held inCriminal Appeal 6474/03 Malka v.  State of Israel (19 February 2004) that:

"When we are dealing with tax offenses, economic offenses, fraudulent offenses, and the like, in which the offender hopes to make a great financial profit, it is important to impose a penalty of imprisonment alongside the fine, so that the offender knows that the offender will not be rewarded.  If he naively thinks that the chance of deriving a substantial financial benefit justifies taking a risk, he must know that if he is prosecuted and fined, he is expected to be deprived of his liberty and to lose the imaginary profit, the unfortunate fruit of the criminal act.  Therefore, it was appropriate and correct to impose on the appellants a significant actual prison sentence as well as a fine, as the District Court did" (emphasis added).

80. The range of punishment for offenses of this type is wide and varied, all according to the circumstances of the case - the act of fraud, its scope, the duration of the deception, the sophistication and planning that accompanied it, the level of forgery, the damage caused and whether it was repaired (of course, the punishment in case law is also influenced by the circumstances of the "perpetrator"). The Supreme Court, in the words of the Honorable Justice Elron, ruled inCriminal Appeals Authority 4514/18 Shimon Aharonian v.  State Attorney's Office (August 3, 2018) that "the punishment policy requires a harsher sentence for those who commit fraud and forgery offenses."
81. In our case, we are dealing with a defendant who committed his actions while he was a lawyer, and in this context the words of the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal 1082/14 Ashraf Jassar v. the State of Israel (July 23, 2015), which I will discuss below:

"Weight must be given to the fact that the appellant is a lawyer, that loyalty and honesty are supposed to be his guiding light.  Without maintaining the basic trust between a lawyer and his client, he will not be able to endanger the legal profession, and even worse - people will not be able to put their trust in lawyers despite the need to need legal services in order to protect their rights."

82. Having reviewed the relevant case law, I am of the opinion that a review of the case law that was cited by counsel for the parties is sufficient in order to determine the customary sentencing policy. Each side has brought a ruling that supports its arguments, and the court must examine what arises from it against the circumstances of the case at hand (including the relevant offenses, their multiplicity, their frequency, their scope, location, the damage caused, and more).  as well as the circumstances of the "doer").
83. The accuser referred to the following rulings:
84. Criminal Appeal 798/22 David Levy v. State of Israel (July 2, 2023) - The appellant, a lawyer by profession, was convicted of multiple offenses of theft by an authorized person, fraud and tax offenses.  The appellant represented the Tax Authority in execution cases and was appointed in many cases to serve as the winning attorney, and as a receiver for the purpose of collecting debts of taxpayers to the Tax Authority.  In the framework of this position, the appellant seized funds in the sum of approximately ILS 16 million, which he received in trust following the realization of debtors' assets in his capacity as receiver, instead of transferring them to the Execution Office or the Tax Authority.  The District Court sentenced him, among other things, to 9 years in prison.  The appeal revolved around the verdict.  The Supreme Court rejected all of the appellant's arguments and ruled that although the appellant was subjected to a heavy punishment, the appellant had committed a sin in his role as a trustee, in violation of the trust of private citizens and the state authorities who placed their trust in him while he served as a receiver, and thus violated the basic trust between a lawyer and a client, with all the implications that this entails.
85. Criminal Appeal 1082/14 Ashraf Jassar v. State of Israel (July 23, 2015) - The appellant was convicted of 5 counts of fraudulent receipt under aggravated circumstances, forgery of a document with the intention of receiving something through it under aggravated circumstances, and prohibition of money laundering, theft by a forgery licensee, fraud under the Income Tax Ordinance.  The appellant is a lawyer with a private firm who entered into rent agreements to represent two Egyptian banks to file claims in Israel.  He received large sums of money from them on the grounds of high fees, for filing a financial claim and for hiring an expert.  In practice, he filed a claim for declaratory relief with a small fee.  He pocketed the money, while presenting his customers with fake receipts regarding the payment of fees.  The District Court sentenced the defendant to 9 years in prison.  His appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected.  Unlike our case, we are talking about banks and not private individuals whose money was taken from them. 

• Criminal Appeal 65/04 Dov Fichman v. State of Israel (2 May 2005) - The appellant was convicted of offenses of fraudulent receipt under aggravated circumstances, forgery under aggravated circumstances, use of a forged document, falsification of evidence, impersonation, connection to a crime, fraud, impeachment during interrogation, violation of a legal provision, obstruction of justice and obstruction of testimony.  In this case, we were talking about forgery and fraud in order to take over a plot of land in Haifa that was owned by a person who perished in the Holocaust, and which was sold for about $550,000 to a third party.  The District Court sentenced him, among other things, to 9 years in prison, suspended imprisonment, a fine of ILS 1,600,000, and compensation to the complainant in the amount of ILS 114,000.  The Supreme Court accepted his appeal against the severity of the sentence and reduced the prison sentence to 7 years in prison.  In this case, the appellant is not a lawyer by profession and this is an isolated incident.

300. Criminal Appeal 72/14 Mohsen Hussam v. State of Israel (April 2, 2015) - The appellant was convicted on the basis of his confession to 7 charges - six of which related to the offenses he committed as a lawyer vis-à-vis his clients (money laundering, theft by an authorized person, fraudulent receipt of something under aggravated circumstances, subterfuge, attempted theft by an authorized person, forgery with the intention of obtaining something through it under aggravated circumstances, use of a forged document with the intention of obtaining something through it under aggravated circumstances) while the seventh charge related to tax offenses (omitting income from a report prepared according to the Income Tax Ordinance, as well as the maintenance and preparation of false ledgers).  The appellant misappropriated clients' money in the amount of ILS 467,300, money laundering and tax offenses in the amount of ILS 695,300.  The District Court sentenced him to 7 years in prison, a conditional sentence and a fine of ILS 50,000.  The Supreme Court reduced his sentence and sentenced him to 6 years in prison.  Unlike our case, we are also dealing with money laundering offenses.  Despite this, there are 7 charges in this matter, the amount of fraud is lower, and so are the tax offenses.
301. Criminal Appeal 7090/06 Amnon Friedman v. State of Israel (17 October 2007) - The appellant, a lawyer by profession, was convicted of committing fraudulent acts against his clients, on 19 different charges.  The appellant represented clients who were involved in road accidents in which they suffered bodily injuries, vis-à-vis the insurance companies.  The appellant reached settlement agreements with the insurers without the knowledge and consent of his customers, and pocketed the money he received.  For this purpose, the appellant forged the signatures of the clients, and when they approached him in order to take an interest in the stage at which their case was being handled, he rejected them again and again.  As a result of his fraudulent acts, the appellant stole more than ILS 1 million, and he used this money for his personal purposes.  The appellant was sentenced to 6 years in prison.  His appeal against the severity of his sentence was rejected.
302. Criminal Appeal 3591/17 Liran Raz v. State of Israel (April 10, 2018) - The appellant was convicted of 8 different charges of multiple offenses of fraud and forgery of documents under aggravated circumstances, in addition to offenses of money laundering and tax offenses.  The District Court sentenced her, among other things, to 6 years in prison, conditional imprisonment, a fine and a total compensation of ILS 1,425,000 to be divided between the complainants.  The Supreme Court intervened in the sentence by canceling the fine component.  In this case, the appellant returned, prior to the filing of the indictment, a significant portion of the funds (in the amount of ILS 800,000) to some of the complainants and sold an apartment she had purchased fraudulently and returned the money she received to the complainants.  Despite this, most of the stolen money has not yet been returned (a cumulative fraudulent sum of ILS 3.4 million).  In this case, the defendant weaved a complex and sophisticated mask of fraud in which she systematically deceived the complainants and large sums of money, while posing as a successful businesswoman in the field of real estate, forging documents and presenting false representations.  Unlike in our case, the appellant is not a lawyer and was also convicted of the offense of money laundering.

• Criminal Appeal 7160/10 Eliyahu Smila v. State of Israel (July 18, 2012) - The appellant was convicted of offenses of forgery of documents under aggravated circumstances, use of false and forged documents, and fraudulent receipt under aggravated circumstances.  The District Court sentenced him to 5 years in prison, a fine of ILS 100,000 and compensation of ILS 70,000.  The background to the conviction is a fraudulent case of transferring shares in a company, which owns ownership rights in a plot of land, and selling the real estate to a third party.  The appellant conspired with another person and transferred to his sole owner land in Tel Aviv that he did not own, by forging various agreements and documents.  Subsequently, he used his false ownership of the land for the purpose of fraudulently pledging the land, as collateral for receiving funds from the bank, and received a bank check in the amount of ILS 2,250,150, and also fraudulently received the sum of ILS 800,000 since he was a party to the aforementioned loan agreement with the bank.  The Supreme Court rejected his appeal against the severity of the sentence.  Unlike our case, this is an isolated incident and the appellant is not a lawyer by
• Criminal Appeal 8642/19, Criminal Appeal 8651/19, Criminal Appeal 8700/19, Criminal Appeal 5/20, Criminal Appeal 19/20, Criminal Appeal 67/20, Criminal Appeal 75/20 Amir Haib et al.   State of Israel (October 13, 2021) (hereinafter: "the Hive Case") - was attached by both parties, with the defendant's counsel attaching the judgment of the District Court on his behalf.

We are dealing with cases of land theft while defrauding the Land Registry Office and innocent third parties, based on forged documents.  On the basis of the forged documents, the appellants acted with the Land Registry Office, submitted to the tax authorities the required declarations regarding the sale or purchase of the real estate, and even filed lawsuits for the purpose of enforcing the agreements and the forged power of attorney.