Criminal Case (Jerusalem) 54589-02-17 State of Israel v. Oshri Sharon - part 283

We are dealing with a large-scale criminal proceeding in which proceedings were held on behalf of the court at all times and on the dates following the filing of the indictment.  These include decisions in preliminary proceedings regarding investigation materials, proceedings and decisions on the arguments raised by the defense and requests on behalf of the defense to amend the indictment, the filing of an amended indictment on February 25, 2021, and much more.  After these matters were decided, evidentiary hearings were held in the case.  These took place relatively frequently, usually once or twice a week.  The hearing of the testimonies, which was spread over about 70 evidentiary sessions, began in April 2021 and ended in May 2023 (see the decision of May 24, 2023 on the termination of all the defense cases).  The final summaries on behalf of the defense were submitted in early April 2024, and the parties' oral summaries were completed shortly thereafter.  Some time later, Wei and Oshri's request was granted and additional evidence was allowed to be submitted (see decision of June 24, 2024).  All of these are proceedings intended to substantially advance the legal clarification, and they fall within the scope of a "court-appointed proceeding" within the meaning of section 9(c1) of the Criminal Procedure Law, and in any case has not passed since the relevant statute of limitations of five years (see: Yaakov Kedmi on Criminal Procedure, Part Two 1322 (2009), from which it emerges that a real proceeding intended to advance the legal proceeding will be considered one that stops the statute of limitations; Criminal Appeal 2144/08 Mondrowitz v. State of Israel, in paragraph 71 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice A. Procaccia (January 14, 2010), where it was held that the provision of the section was intended to enable the law enforcement authorities to do their job when they were freed from the shackles of the statute of limitations, including "during the conduct of the legal proceedings" and that the statute of limitations would be reopened when "no legal proceedings are taking place" and see also what is stated there in paragraph 74 of the limitation according to which a new limitation period will be opened "only upon the conclusion of the judicial proceedings"; Compare also: Extradition Case (Jerusalem District) 68801-03-22 State of Israel v. Metulla in paragraph 25 of the judgment of the Honorable Justice S. Renner (November 13, 2022), where it was held that testimonies taken in court, prior to the filing of an indictment and for the purpose of advancing an extradition proceeding – i.e., testimonies intended to advance the proceedings – can be viewed as a court proceeding that resets the statute of limitations).