3.3. Interim Summary: Should it be determined that the immunity granted to the organs applies to the defendant?
In light of all of the above, it can be summarized and determined that the purpose of the theory of organs is to attribute the behavior and thoughts of an organ to society, in order to impose criminal liability on the company. It should not be deduced, both as a question of legal interpretation and as a question of policy, that the immunity granted to the organs – Aharonson, Weiss and Hirsch – will also be attributed to Siemens Israel.
- The rights of the corporation as a criminal defendant
4.1 The rule - the rights of the corporation
It seems that everyone agrees that the corporation, in principle, has rights, including constitutional rights, including its rights as a defendant. Everyone also agrees, because there are rights that assume the existence of a human being, as opposed to a corporation. The Honorable President Zmora noted this already in the Beit Hashita case (ibid., at p. 141), when he clarified that the common sense test must be applied, provided that the corporation's right is not deprived. In his words:
"Insofar as the provisions speak of the personal delivery of the summons to trial, of arrest in the event of the defendant's failure to appear, of a confession of guilt, etc., the subject matter and the glue of the matter demand that incorporated bodies be excluded from the provision of the word 'person,' just as in the imposition of a punishment they must be removed from imprisonment and fines should be reduced.....The question of whether the body admits guilt as a body should be addressed to its legal representative appearing on behalf of the association or society...And in general, the instructions on the matter must be shocked...Bodies are incorporated according to the attribute of reason and honesty, provided that their right to defense is not deprived."
The distinction between a human being and a corporation in terms of the enjoyment of rights was discussed by the Honorable President A. Barak in Other Municipality Applications 105/92 Re'em Engineers Contractors in Tax Appeal v. Municipality of Nazareth Illit, 47(5) 189 (1993), where the freedom of expression of a corporation was discussed and held: