The death of Shmaryahu Cohen was subject of Police Complaint by afriend/relative already in 2002. However, at that time, the complainantscould not provide a reasonable motive for a wrongful death.More recently, Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO), filedadditional data with the Israel Police, alleging that the motive for Chief Clerk Cohen's death was the unlawful takeover of the servers and electronic recordsof the Israeli Supreme Court, for which Mr Cohen was the lawful custodian.In parallel to filing the data with Israel Police, the same data were filed withMK Rotem, as a request for the establishment of a Parliamentary Investigation Committee, pertaining to allegations of corruption in the Officeof the Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court following the wrongful death of MrCohen in 2002, and wrongful occupation of his office by Ms Lifschitz.
The request for a Parliamentary Investigation Committee notes that events inthe Supreme Court in 2002 should be seen as second in significance only tothe murder of Prime Minister Yitzhaq Rabin in 1995, relative to the nature of the regime in the State of Israel today.In his response, MK Rotem dismisses the request to establish a Parliamentary Investigation Committee, claiming that he was “convinced that theappropriate authorities would perform their duties on the best side.”
In his follow-up request, Dr Zernik points out that the Israel Police complaint,pertaining to the conduct of Ms Lifschitz, was filed over a year ago, and yet, noresponse was received from the Israel Police on this matter. Therefore, MK Roten and the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee is asked to at leastascertain, whether “Chief Clerk” of the Supreme Court, Ms Sarah Lifschitzholds a lawful appointment record. The follow up request adds that suchmatter clearly falls within the purview of the Committee, moreover, is a matterthat should be easy for the Committee to ascertain.In his follow-up response, MK Rotem again dismisses the request, claimingthat he “would not overstep the appropriate authorities in this matter.”Finally, Dr Zernik requests that the MK Rotem at least provide information, which should have been public information all along: Is there a lawfully appointed Chief Clerk in the Israeli Supreme Court. Dr Zernik notes that theCommittee is “the appropriate authority in this matter”.Over the past couple of years, others have refused to answer on questions,pertaining to the lawfulness of the appointment of “Chief Clerk” SarahLifschitz:
"Chief Clerk" of the Supreme Court Sarah Lifschitz,
Presiding Justice of the Israeli Supreme Court Asher Grunis,
The office of Administration of Courts.
Israel PoliceEvidence of corruption of the Israeli Supreme Court electronic records wascentral to the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the UN HumanRights Council (HRC), which was incorporated in the 2013 HRC ProfessionalStaff Report on Human Rights in Israel (paragraph 25), with a note referring