The defense's arguments in this context are mainly relevant to Ituran. The claim is that Ituran acted illegally when it continued to collect and store data on a vehicle whose owner announced his desire to terminate the contract with it and cancel the subscription. This conduct indicates a violation of the privacy of the users of the vehicle in which the Ituran unit is installed.
In this case, the Chevrolet vehicle was registered with a different insurance company (see: P/15, as well as the words of Eliran Sabag), and as is well known, a company does not "enjoy" the protection of its privacy (section 3 of the Protection of Privacy Law, the definition of a "person"), and there was no claim by any party on behalf of the insurance company that it had no interest in storing data. The purpose of data collection is to locate the vehicle and not to locate a specific person.
The defendant in our case was not the registered owner of the vehicle, was not an employee of Ituran or a customer of its company whose contractual rights were violated. It should be recalled that the defendant himself, who was in possession of the Chevrolet car at the relevant times, explicitly stated in his testimony that "it is good to have an identification in the car", so that he did not claim that his right to privacy was violated, and in fact claimed the opposite. To the extent that his right to privacy has been violated, this is an infringement whose weight must be examined against the significance of the evidence collected in the course of an investigation of a murder offense under aggravated circumstances. Going beyond what is required, the contractual relationship between Ituran and the customer, from which the company's obligation to the customer is derived, does not establish confidentiality for the customer from the legal authorities.
Thus, for example, in High Court of Justice case 3809/08 The Association for Civil Rights in Israel v. Israel Police (May 28, 2012):
"[...] The telecommunications company's obligation to provide the customer with a confidential number does not establish confidentiality for the customer from the law enforcement authorities."