The senior prosecutor Nissim Marom, who was appointed to examine Shlomo Filber's case, determined that Filber violated the agreement with the state. Following the legal opinions in the prosecution, there is support for summoning Filber for a hearing before filing an indictment, so this is the direction that is currently emerging, but no final decision has been made yet. This was reported by Netael Bender in 'Israel Hayom.'
Frontally conflicting reports
Filber provided conflicting reports to the police and the court, thereby violating the agreement with the state to be a witness in the case against Netanyahu and receive immunity from criminal prosecution in the same matter.
Filber reported to the police that Netanyahu signaled with his hand during a 'guidance meeting' to be lenient with Bezeq, while in court, he stated that although Netanyahu did signal with his hand, the implication was different: to remove Elovitch, the owner of Bezeq, from above him.
In addition, in 2016 Filber hid from the legal advice to the government the conflict of interest between Netanyahu and the Bezeq company and provided other explanations in court.
Filber also told the police that he gave special treatment to Bezeq and Shaul Elovitch, while in court he contradicted himself and claimed that he did not give them special treatment.
The possibility of filing an indictment arises
In the State's Witness Agreement, Filber signed that "If it is found that he violated one or more of his obligations and statements in this agreement, or it is revealed that he provided false statements in the affair or lied... the State shall be entitled to release itself from its obligations and shall be free to bring him to trial and seek his arrest until the conclusion of proceedings against him in the matter."
During Filber's testimony, the possibility of filing an indictment against him arose. After the plaintiff, Tirosh, requested to declare him a hostile witness, Filber understood the implication and said, "I am not a hostile witness, and I do not intend to contradict my statements to the police; I tried to clarify. I will retract my last answer and try to stick to my version with the police." The President of the panel of judges, Judge Rivka Friedman-Feldman, noted that responses cannot be retracted.
Economic sanctions
The prosecution has the option to take action against Filber through financial means, in addition to or in place of filing a criminal indictment. For example, they can choose not to return the 200,000 shekels that were deposited as collateral for his compliance with the state's agreement. Additionally, a civil lawsuit can be filed against him.
Filber has the option to appeal to the Supreme Court (Bagatz) against the cancellation of the agreement. However, filing a criminal indictment against a state witness for breach of contract is an exceptional event.
0 Comments