Caselaw

Criminal Case (Tel Aviv) 4368-05-16 State of Israel v. Siemens Israel Ltd. - part 113

July 3, 2017
Print

This, it was held, because the doctrine of jurisprudential inadmissibility established in the Issacharov  case obligates the court before which the claim of inadmissibility is raised to examine the severity of the alleged defects in the manner in which the evidence is obtained.  The court is also required to strike a balance in accordance with the provisions of the limitation clause between the defendant's right to a fair trial and conflicting public interests, which may justify the admission of the evidence despite the defect in its obtainment.  In the framework of this balance, the court is required to consider  the nature of the illegality or unfairness in obtaining the evidence, the possible effect of the illegality or unfairness on the reliability of the evidence, and possibly even the importance of the evidence and the severity of the offense.  The court further ruled that this complex balance should be made by the court hearing the main proceeding, since it has before it the fullest factual and legal picture regarding the case before it and has the best ability to assess – on the basis of all the relevant data brought before it – the degree to which the possible harm to the fairness of that proceeding as a result of receiving one piece of evidence or another.

Admittedly, these words were said in relation to a preliminary proceeding conducted during the police interrogation (according to  section 43 of the Arrests Law) and the court noted  (the Honorable President D. Beinisch in paragraph 31 of her judgment at p. 35) that "there is no dispute that in terms of the order in which the evidence was presented at trial, it is certainly possible to discuss the question of the admissibility of this or that evidence immediately after the opening of the trial", However, it will be possible to consider the considerations that the court discussed in the Shemesh case, in the case before me, only at the conclusion of the main proceeding, when it is possible to examine the fairness of the proceeding in light of all the circumstances.

Previous part1...112113
114...138Next part
Skip to content