The second addendum to the law determined, in section B, until the entry into force of the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law (Amendment No. 26 and Temporary Order), another appeal - 2017, on December 7, 2017, as follows:
Funds, in excess of the sum of ILS 500,000, whether in a single transaction in the property or in several transactions in the property that accumulate to the said amount within a period of three months...
The second addendum to the law, after its amendment in 2017, states as follows:
Property or funds with a value of at least ILS 150,000, whether in a single transaction in the property or in several transactions in the property that add up to the said amount within a period of two months.
- Since the section explicitly states that it is not necessary that any independent action with prohibited property should reach the minimum amount separately, but rather that it is possible to examine "several actions in the property that add up to the amount", it is necessary to examine whether the accumulation of actions performed by each defendant together reaches the minimum amount.
- Defendants 9 and 10 carried out the operations with prohibited property, as attributed in the twenty-eighth indictment, between November 2016 and February 2017, i.e., for three months. Hence, it is possible to attribute to defendant 9 the offense of operating with prohibited property, in accordance with the scope of the sums that were relevant prior to the amendment to the law on December 7, 2017 - that is, when the cumulative scope of the offense, over a period of three months, exceeds ILS 500,000. The sums attributed to Defendant 9 together with Defendant 10 add up to the sum of ILS 2,813,200, which significantly exceeds the minimum set in the supplement.
Therefore, it is not enough to have an independent action with prohibited property in the amount of ILS 16,230 in relation to defendants 9 and 10 (section 861 of the indictment), since this action should not be examined separately, but rather in its accumulation to other sums. It should be noted that the prosecution must correct a clerical error that occurred in sections 861-862, in which the end of the period of action was not stated.
- Defendants 23 and 24 performed, according to the charges in the nineteenth indictment, work under a restrictive arrangement, in a cumulative sum of ILS 570,000 in the period between September 1, 2017 and August 31, 2018, i.e., for about a year, some of which was relevant to the period prior to the amendment to the law and part to the period after it. Although this amount exceeds the minimum required before and after the amendment, since it was paid over the course of a year, it is not possible to know, at this stage, whether it meets the condition of paying ILS 500,000 for three months (before the amendment) or paying ILS 150,000 for two months (after the amendment).
In this regard, it must also be taken into account that in the thirteenth indictment it is attributed that following a restrictive arrangement in which defendants 23 and 24 were involved, they received a sum of approximately ILS 7,300,000, between September 1, 2017 and August 31, 2020, meaning that in a period that partially coincides with the period attributed to the nineteenth indictment, and on the face of it, it appears that there will be room to sum up the funds received by defendants 23 and 24, in each period in relation to the tenders described (as the prosecution concluded in the twenty-eighth indictment).