The Defendant's Testimony
Main Investigation (Transcript of November 24, 2022)
- The defendant denied the charges against him in the first charge. At the request of his direct commander, District Commander Hani Abu Rish, the defendant prepared an estimate according to the tender clauses, in the amount of NIS 71,230, including VAT. The estimate was submitted to the district commander, who clarified that the bid should be reduced. The defendant inquired who could carry out the work, Reuven, whom he already knew, was referred to him, and the defendant approved it. The defendant sent Reuven a sketch on WhatsApp, and Reuven sent him a price quote that was not far from reality. Afterwards, the defendant, Reuven and a TAL officer met in the field, changed the sketch, Reuven gave a price quote and the defendant upgraded it (Reuven wrote 15 meters and forgot handrails, the defendant corrected to 18 meters and added handrails) (pp. 529-530).
At the end of this process, Reuven gave a price quote of NIS 44,250, and the defendant understood that this offer was preferable to the estimate of NIS 71,230, even when 12% was added to the main contractor (p. 530).
- After the work began, Reuven announced that he was "not up to it", and the defendant reminded him that he had signed an agreement. There were quite a few arguments between them regarding the work. Reuven carried out the work and received the money from the contractor - NIS 44,000. The main contractor earned 12%. According to the defendant's calculation, Reuven paid about NIS 53,000 for the raw material in the project, at a price of NIS 17,000 per galvanized ton, in addition to the cost of crane and labor. The defendant expressed his surprise as to how it was possible, according to this calculation, that Reuven transferred him NIS 15,000 (p. 530).
- The defendant denied the claim that he had received NIS 15,000 in cash from Reuven, and claimed that Reuven could not come to his office without a permit, since there was a guard at the entrance. In this regard, I will mention that the indictment states that Reuven arrived at a place near the IPS facility and not to the defendant's office.
- In this indictment, the commissioning party is the prison, which wrote a program and made sure that the project was carried out according to its requirements through a project manager on its behalf – a logistical support officer – who did not come to testify. The defendant was in close contact with him and visited the project twice a week (pp. 538-539). As part of the execution of the project, there were "security factors". Other construction officers usually take security factors in projects, but the defendant did not do so: "It is customary to take a security factor... but I did not have such a situation, so I keep coming out with arguments" (p. 544).
- As for the Savyon Yard project (which is not part of the first indictment, but which the accuser referred to as a background for the hearing of charges 1-3), the defendant prepared an estimate that included fire detection and extinguishing systems, which stood at NIS 230,000 (p. 536). To his surprise, the IPS approached Reuven, who is not a main contractor or a concessionaire, and Reuven gave an offer of NIS 129,000, which did not include doors and bars, air conditioning, an increase in the ramp, an emergency exit door and a fire detection system. This proposal was approved (plus 12% for another contractor). The defendant lost control and became angry with Reuven, and due to the required work that was not carried out there, he refused to sign the inspection of the project (p. 537).
Cross-examination (transcript of February 20, 2023)
- The prosecutor referred to conversation No. 557 between the defendant and Reuven on February 1, 2018, in which the defendant said that he had registered 18 meters, but in fact it was only 15 meters. The prosecutor accused the defendant that this was another example of inflation, but the defendant denied this (p. 559). To the question of whether the defendant's words to Reuven later in the conversation – that he would travel alone and not speak "with them" – related to a "combination" between the defendant and Reuven to increase the cost of the project without the matter being discovered, the defendant replied that Reuven was lying (p. 559). The defendant denied all of Reuven's statements regarding an incident of bribery (p. 560).
Charge 1 - The accuser's summaries
- In her summaries, the accuser referred to the main evidence in the indictment and claimed that all the evidence establishes an unequivocal basis, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Reuven acted in accordance with the defendant's instructions, inflated the cost of the project while stealing the public coffers by virtue of his position as a public servant, and set aside the bribe money for the defendant in accordance with his demand.
Charge 1 - Defense Summaries
- In the defense summaries it was noted that the ramp project did not appear in the IPS tender and therefore the defendant prepared a price estimate for this project, according to bills of quantities. The sum amounted to NIS 71,213, including VAT (a table detailing the price estimate was attached, according to which 3.1 tons of steel concrete, at a price of NIS 17,200 per ton, were calculated, and the cost of this component – NIS 53,320 – it should be noted that the table was attached as an item in the defense summaries, without reference to the exhibit from the exhibits file). However, the district budget for the project was NIS 58,000, including VAT. The defendant met with Reuven at the Hadarim District Court, where Reuven gave a price quote that was higher than the district budget, but after deliberations, Reuven submitted a price quote that matched the district budget, in the sum of NIS 57,988.20. The details of the proposal (in which the defense also did not refer to any exhibit) are as follows:
Quotation of Subcontractor 44, 250 NIS