(2) Anyone who provides false information as stated in paragraph (1) regarding prohibited property shall be liable to the penalty prescribed in subsection (a)."
The factual element of the offense in our case is the provision of false information – opening a fictitious customer card in the name of ZyPods, for the purpose of registering check discounting transactions in the name of a fictitious customer. As for the required mental element, the offense is an offense of conduct of the "target" type, and therefore the prosecution is required to prove that the defendant was aware of the factual element and the purpose component – "so that there will be no report under sections 7 or 8A or in order not to report in accordance with section 9, or in order to cause an incorrect report, according to the aforesaid sections." Section 7(b) of the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law and the orders issued by virtue thereof to the entities specified in the third appendix to the Law (including financial service providers) deal with "identification, reporting, registration and safeguarding duties..." that apply to these entities. The change is a financial services provider. The evidence indicates that the defendant was aware of the opening of the fictitious customer card, as well as his desire to cause incorrect reporting of the transactions in the checks, in the name of the fictitious customer card, while concealing his own identity.
The elements of the offense exist in our case.
I therefore convict the defendant of bribery and theft by a public servant attributed to him in Charge 4 in relation to the sum of NIS 145,370, as well as offenses under the Prohibition of Money Laundering Law as detailed above.
Charge 5
The Indictment
- In April 2016 or thereabouts, Shlomo Hatuka (hereinafter: "Hatuka"), who worked as a subcontractor in various IPS projects, prepared a pricing for the construction of work on the project "Building a Roofing at the Entrance to Neve Tirza Prison" in the sum of NIS 29,000.
- Shortly after the aforementioned date, the defendant contacted Cuta and instructed him to "inflate" the price quote to the sum of NIS 37,000, and Cuta increased the amount of his bid accordingly, with the intention that in exchange for the approval of the inflated price quote, he would transfer the sum of NIS 5,000 to the defendant in cash.
- The defendant, in his capacity as the construction officer of the Central District of the IPS, made sure to approve the inflated price quote in exchange for a cut gift.
- Upon completion of the work and before receiving the payment from the IPS, the defendant contacted the cutter and instructed him to transfer to him the sum of NIS 5,000, which is the amount increased after deducting the customary tax rate.
- Hatuka agreed to the defendant's request, only after receiving the payment from the IPS, so that the defendant, as part of his position as a construction officer for the Central District of the IPS, would allow him to continue his employment as a subcontractor in the IPS and assign him future work as a subcontractor for the IPS.
- After receiving the payment from the IPS, close to the aforementioned date, the defendant and Cuta arrived with their vehicles at a meeting point, in a place unknown to the accuser, where Cuta gave the defendant a gift of NIS 5,000 in cash, due to the defendant's dependence and control over the subcontractors as described in the general part of the indictment, and out of a desire to give the defendant a gift so that the defendant would allow him to continue his employment as a subcontractor in the IPS, and to assign him future jobs as a subcontractor in the IPS.
- In his aforementioned acts, in his activity as a public servant, the defendant took a bribe in the sum of NIS 5,000, for an action related to his position. In addition, the defendant, as a public servant, stole something that was the property of the state or something that came into his possession by virtue of his work, and valued at NIS 8,000. The provisions of the law under which the defendant was charged are taking a bribe (an offense under section 290(a) of the law); theft by a public servant (an offense under section 390 of the law).
The Response to the Indictment 5
- The defendant denied the aforesaid accusation that he asked the contractor Shlomo Hatuka to "inflate" the pricing offer for the project, and that he demanded and transferred bribe money to him by Hatuka.
Charge 5 - Evidence