"Indeed, we should not accept a situation in which an officer does not bear criminal responsibility for an act he committed solely for the reason that he acted as an organ or agent of the corporation and for the purpose of benefiting it. As a person who operates in a corporation, that officer is personally responsible for criminal offenses if he himself fulfills the foundations of the offense for which he is accused. The liability of the corporation in this situation, for that offense or for an offense for which other circumstances are required, joins the responsibility of the organization."
In the Nehoshtan case, the Honorable Justice Y. Kedmi insisted that there should be no mistake in the "personization" of the corporation and the attribution of the organ's actions to the corporation, and that the organ should be exempted. It should be remembered that the person who committed the offense is a man of flesh and blood, who must first and foremost bear responsibility for his actions, and in his words (at p. 124 of the judgment):
"By virtue of the doctrine of organs, Naaman owes Nehushtan as its organ by his actions, and it bears responsibility as such for the offenses that are the subject of the two charges. However, Naaman does not cease to be a human being who bears criminal responsibility for his actions, and like any person – regardless of whether he is an "organ" of a corporation and the fact that the offense he committed was committed by him as part of his activity as an "organ" – Naaman bears personal criminal responsibility for his actions. The theory of organs, which presents the organ as the "human face" of the corporation and sees the two together as one "common" "entity", is intended to give the corporation a human character trait that allows it to be held personally responsible for criminal offenses – as a corporation. However, the "humanization" of the corporation by assimilating the organ into its "personality" does not deprive the organist of his "humanity", and therefore, even when he acts as an "organ", he continues to be a "person" who bears criminal responsibility for his actions...Naaman's responsibility is therefore rooted in his own conduct, and the fact that this behavior constitutes at the same time also the conduct of Nehoshtan does not exempt him personally from his own responsibility.".