Subsequently, counsel for the respondent asked for consultation, and the court clarified that it does not express an opinion on the merits of the case, one way or the other, and that there is also the question of the use of the authority according to Section 216 30The Criminal Procedure Law.
The hearing ended with the following words, from my colleague, the judge א' שטיין, which were addressed to the respondent's counsel:
"Well, ma'am, there are two issues to address, one, that's the very matter if you stand by everything we've heard, which both the length of the proceeding has to be taken into account, as well as the issue of 216. Could it be that you are not interested? So if you're not interested? So we are not interested either" (p. 28, lines 9-11 of the transcript).
- The beginning of the mishap and the mistake that stands, in my view, at the basis of the decision required in this application, can be found in what was said at the end of the hearing that took place on September 18, 2024.
At this stage, it is sufficient to note the following: At this time, it has been clarified that what this Court intended to offer the parties is an agreed arrangement whereby the Respondent will waive its request to convict the Applicant of the offenses of rape and indecent act, while the Applicant will agree that our authority has been exercised under Article 216 to the Criminal Procedure Law for convicting him of the offense of assault (and in the absence of such agreement as stated above, the completion of the parties' argument regarding the use of our authority under Article 216 to the Criminal Procedure Law). On the other hand, what they understood, both the Respondent and the Applicant, was that the court recommended that the Respondent withdraw its request to convict the Applicant of the offenses of rape and indecent act, and that if the Respondent wishes the court to convict the Applicant, instead, of the offense of assault, the parties will argue regarding the use of the authority according to Article 216 of the Criminal Procedure Law.