Human Rights Alert (NGO)

Joseph Zernik, PhD

"
6133301 ",33407 "
Email: [Link]@[Link]

2015-08-09 Request for clarifications by Director of the Courts, Judge

Judge Michael Spitzer, Director of the Courts, Shula Zaken and Ehud Olmert
-Defendants in the Holyland corruption scandal, Judge David Rosen.
____

OccupyTLV,August9JosephZernik,PhD,ofHumanRightsAlert(NGO)fileda
requestforclarificationswithJudgeMichaelSpitzer,DirectoroftheAdministration
ofCourts,regardingconductofJudgeDavidRosenintheHolylandcorruptioncase.
Therequestfollowedadubiousletter,recentlyreceivedbyDrZernikfromthe
AdministrationofCourts,asaresponseonaninquirythatneverwas...
TheletterclaimsthatpostitdecisionsoftheIsraelicourtscannotbeviewedfrom
computationalperspective,andthattheIsraelicourtsconductfairprocessanddue
serviceinrelationshiptoRequeststoInspectcourtrecords.
TheIsraeliSupremeCourtitselfdeclaredtherighttoinspectcourtrecordsa
fundamentalprincipleofademocraticregime,andaconstitutional,suprastatutory
[Link],asurveyconductedbyDrZernik,aspartofacademicresearch,
showsthattheIsraelicourtsroutinelydenypublicaccesstocourtrecords,
particularlyincases,whichoriginateingovernmentcorruption.
Therequestforclarifications,senttoday,focusesononeoftheworstcorruptioncases
inIsrael'shistorytheHolylandcorruptionscandal,involvingformerprimeminister
EhudOlmertandhissecretary.
Theletter,basedondetailedanalysisoftherecordsinthiscase,andaseriesof
RequeststoInspect,presentssurprisingconclusions:
1. Inspectionoftherecords,whicharepubliclyaccessible,andtheprocessinvolvedin
RequeststoInspectcourtfilegeneratedmountingevidenceofperversion,forgery,
and/orfraudintherecordsandprocessintheHolylandcorruptioncase,which
standsincontrastbyscopeandnaturewiththerecordsandprocessinothercourt
files,whereJudgeDavidRosenpresided.

1/3

2. Detailedinspectionoftherecordswouldleadareasonablepersontoconcludethat
JudgeDavidRoseniswellversedintheminutiaeofcriminalcourtprocedures,but
excelledinpervertingcourtrecordsintheHolylandcorruptioncase.
3. ThefindingsintheHolylandcaseandothercases,pertainingtogovernment
corruption,alsoproduceevidenceregardingthefundamentalfraudindesign,
implementationandoperationofNetHaMishpatITsystemofthecourtswhich
wasestablishedatthecostofNIShundredsofmillions,throughaprojectof
nationalscope,undertheauthorityofseniorjudicialofficers.
4. Thefindings,outlinedinthelettertoJudgeSpitzer,arediametricallytheopposite
ofmediacoverageofcourtprocessinthiscase,andJudgeDavidRosen'sconduct.
5. Thefindings,outlinedinthelettertoJudgeSpitzer,underscorethesuspicionof
fraudinAttorneyHeliBracha'sletterfromtheAdministrationofCourts,which
makesludicrousstatementsregardingtheabilitytoseepostitdecisionsfrom
computationalperspective,regardingrequesttoinspectprocess,regardingservice
ofcourtdecisions...
Below is the full letter.
____

, ,
.

, ,
. ", ,
______

- Human Rights Alert NGO , ' 9 , "

2/3

.1

.2
.3

.4
.5

,
,/ ,
.
-
, .
,
, , , .
" , ,
, .

.
"
,
" " , , "
" ...

3/3

Human Rights Alert (NGO)

"
6133301 ",33407 "
Email: [Link]@[Link]

[]
August9,2015
JudgeMichaelSpitzer
Director,AdministrationofCourts
Byemail:MICHALTS@[Link],ronam@[Link],Pniyot@[Link],
Dover@[Link]
RE:Requestforclarificationsregardinglettersfromyouroffice,suspectedfraud,and
suspectedperversions,forgeryand/orfraudbyJudgeDavidRosenintheHolyland
corruptionscandalcourtfile.
Yourresponsewithin45daysiskindlyrequested.
DearJudgeSpitzer:
Pleaseacceptinstantletterascontinuationofmypreviousletter,[1] whichasksfor
clarifications,pertainingtolettersbyAttorneyHeliBracha(whosepositionremains
unknown)oftheAdministrationofCourts,whichstatesthatthereisnowaytoseepostit
decisionsfromcomputationalperspective,andalsostatesthattheIsraelicourtsconduct
fairprocessandfairserviceoftheirdecisionsinrequeststoinspectcourtrecordsasa
routinematter.
Asstatedinmypreviousletter,AttorneyBracha'slettersaresuspectedfraud,whichintends
tounlawfullydeprivethepublic'srighttoinspectcourtdecisions,whicharenotlawfully
[Link]'slettersshouldalsobeseenasanattemptto
coverupthefundamentallackofintegrityinthedesign,implementationandoperationof
[Link],ITsystemofthedistrictandmagistratecourtswas
developedandimplementedoverthepastdecadeatthecostofNIShundredsofmillions.
AttachedpleasefindevidencefromNetHaMishpatrecordinStateofIsraelvZernietal
(102910112)[2] theHolylandcorruptionscandalwhichrefutesBracha'sstatements.
Thereisnodoubtthatthecaseholdthehighestpublicpolicysignificancerelativetopublic
trustinthejudicialsysteminparticular,[Link]
evidence,providedherein,includesbutisnotlimitedto:Maintenanceofdoublebooksfor
dockets,failuretoregistertheentryofjudgments,apostitdecisionaspartofaLevy
Decree,whereperversion,forgeryand/orfraudaresuspected,andrefusalofthecourtsto
dulyservedulyexecutedcourtrecordonrequeststoinspectcourtfiles.
ThereisnodoubtthatAttorneyBracha'slettersandyourresponseswouldbecomeimportant
inputintheongoingacademicresearchregardingintegrity,orlackthereofofITsystemsand
thecourtsintheStateofIsrael.
1] 2015-08-04 Request for response by Director of the Courts Judge Michael Spitzer on letters by Attorney
Bracha of his office suspected fraud //
- " , ,
[Link]
2] 2015-03-01 State of Israel v Zerni (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court: Holyland corruption scandal,
former PM Olmert, and Judge Rosen: Net-HaMishpat records public access, remote terminal //
, , :( "10291-01-12)
, :
[Link]

1/28

Truly,
JosephZernik,PhD
HumanRightsAlert(NGO)
OccupyTLV
CC:
Activists,Israelicivilsocietyorganizations,scholarsinIsraelandabroad,Israelielectedand
governmentofficials.
_______

EvidenceofperversionofrecordsandprocessbyJudgeDavidRosenin
StateofIsraelvZerni(102910112)intheTelAvivDistrictCourtthe
Holylandcorruptionscandal.
ThecoreoftheHolylandcorruptionscandalistheofferingofbribesbyinterestedparties,
andthetakingofbribesbygovernmentofficials,includingformerprimeministerEhud
[Link]
publicpolicysignificanceofthehighestdegreerelativetopublictrustinthejudicialsystem
inparticular,[Link],Olmert
andZakenwereconvictedbyJudgeDavidRosenoftheTelAvivDistrictCourtandsentenced
[Link],whileOlmert,accordingtomediareports,is
stillengagedtoday(August2015)inanappealprocessintheSupremeCourt.
TheTelAvivDistrictCourthasbeenadministeredbyNetHaMishpatITsystemforover5
[Link]
costofNIShundredsofmillions,[Link]
presentedherein,alloriginateinNetHaMishpat.
[Link]

a)

2/28

b)
Figure 1. State of Israel v Zerni et al (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court, decisions dockets in an
unsealed file - Open to the Public: a) Public access system the docket, as seen in Net-HaMishpat on April
6, 2015, holds 63 decisions. b) Office of the Clerk system the docket, as seen in Net-HaMishpat on March
22, 2015 holds 523 decisions. Neither docket holds duly executed verdicts and sentencing records for
Defendants Olmert and Zaken, in contrast with other Defendants in the same court file, and in contrast with
Defendants in other criminal court files presided by Judge David Rosen.

____
InspectiondiscoveredthatwhilethedocketintheOfficeoftheClerksystemheld523
decisions,thedocketinthepublicaccesssystemheldonly63decisionsinthesamecourt
[Link]
byoutsideobserversacardinalsignoflackofintegrityintheconductofthiscourtfile,anda
[Link],themaintenanceof
doublebookswouldraiseconcernsregardingcompetenceoftheOfficeoftheClerkandthe
TelAvivDistrictCourt.
ThelawoftheStateofIsraelregardinginspectionofcourtdecisionsisclear:
RegulationsoftheCourtsInspectionofCourtFiles(2003),Article2(b)states:Every
personispermittedtoinspectdecisions,whicharenotprohibitedforpublicationbylaw.
JudgmentinpetitionTheAssociationforCivilRightsinIsraelvMinisterofJustice(High
CourtofJustice5917/97)declaresthatpublicaccesstocourtrecordsisafundamental
principleinademocraticregimeandaconstitutional,[Link]
Judgmentalsoclarifiedtheexpectation,thatwithimplementationofNetHaMishpat(IT
systemofthecourts),decisionsandjudgmentswouldbeopenforinspectionbyevery
persononanongoingbasis,pursuanttothelimitsinthelaw.[underlineaddedjz]
TherighttoinspectcourtdecisionsisalsofoundedintheUniversalDeclarationofHuman
Rights,Article10,whichestablishestherightforfair,publichearing.
Therefore,themaintenanceofdoublebooksforDecisionsDocketswouldbedeemed,no
doubt,asconduct,whichisintendedtounlawfullydenyongoingpublicaccesstocourt
decisions.
Inspectionofvariouscourtfilesindicatesthatjudgesdecideonanarbitraryandcapricious
basis,whichdecisionstopermitpublicaccessto,withnolawfulpublicationprohibition.
However,thepostitdecisions,asaclass,arethosethatpublicaccessismostoften

3/28

[Link],asdemonstratedinFigures3,4,and7,below,thepostit
[Link]
addition,asdemonstratedinthosefigures,thepostitdecisionsarealsostrikingintheir
dubiouscontent.
Suchcombinationmustraiseconcernthatthepostitdecisionswerecreatedfromthestart,
andareroutinelyemployedasaninstrumentforpervertingcourtprocess.
[Link],andconductofanappealintheSupreme
Courtfromunenteredjudgments.

Figure 2. State of Israel v Zerni et al (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court, Judgments tab in an
unsealed court file - Open to the Public: The lists in both the public access system and Office of the Clerk
system in Net-HaMishpat fail to show duly executed verdict and sentencing records, pertaining to Defendants
Olmert and Zaken, in contrast with other Defendants in the same court file, and in contrast with Defendants in
other court files, where Judge David Rosen presided. The list in the Judgments tab include three records:
a) May 13, 2014 Instruction for the Supervisor of Community Service in the Prison Service to file an Opinion
Avraham Feiner, by Judge David Rosen an unsigned sentencing record, pertaining to most Defendants
in this court file.
b) June 9, 2014 Instruction for the Supervisor of Community Service in the Prison Service to file an Updated
Opinion - Feiner, by Judge David Rosen sentencing record, pertaining to Defendant Avraham Feiner.
c) June 19, 2014 Sentencing dated June 19, 2014, rendered by David Rosen, by Judge David Rosen
sentencing record, pertaining to Defendant Uri Lupolianki.
____

InspectionshowsthatnodulyexecutedjudgmentrecordswereenteredinNetHaMishpat
system(eitherthepublicaccesssystemortheOfficeoftheClerksystem)fordefendants
OlmertandZaken.
Valid,publicregistrationofjudgmentsisconsideredoneofthefundamentalBooksof
Courtinanycompetentcourt,andisoneofthefundamentaldutiesoftheOfficeofthe
[Link],moreover,theconductofanappealin
theSupremeCourtfromanunenteredjudgment,mustraiseseriousconcernsregarding
integrityoftheTelAvivDistrictCourtandbeyond.

4/28

Figure 3. State of Israel v Zerni et al (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court, March 18, 2015 Post-it
Decision by Judge David Rosen, on Request to Inspect duly executed judgment records, pertaining to
Defendants Olmert and Zaken. The Decision, which is unsigned and unauthenticated, was initially hidden
from the Requester by failing to register it in the publicly accessible Decisions Docket and failing to duly
serve it on the Requester. Even after repeat Requests for Due Process, the decision was never duly served
on the Requester. The Decision says: The court file, where inspection is requested, is physically located in
the Supreme Court, due to the appeal process, originating in the Judgment. Therefore, it is impossible to grant
the Request.
_____

In an effort to ascertain the existence, or lack thereof, and registration of entry of judgments,
pertaining to Defendants Olmert and Zaken, request was filed to inspect such records. Judge David
Rosen's March 18, 2015 Decision confirmed that no judgments pertaining to Olmert and Zaken were
entered in Net-HaMishpat. The explanation provided for denial of the Request to Inspect was that
the records were physically transferred to the Supreme Court. Such claim, in a Court, which has
been electronically administered for over 5 years, is entirely unreasonable.
Moreover, Judge Rosen's Decision is unsigned and unauthenticated, and Judge Rosen refused to
provide a signed and authenticated copy of the March 18, 2015 decision. The March 18 Decision
record, as is, wouldn't be deemed a valid court record by any reasonable person.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the March 18 Decision was initially hidden from the Requester,
by failing to register it in the public access system and by failing to serve it on the Requester. Even
after repeat Requests for Due Process no valid, signed and authenticated copy of the Decision was
ever duly served on the Requester.
At the same time, it should be noted that the Administration of Courts distributed to media an
electronic judgment for Defendant Olmert in the internet site of the Spokesman of the
Administration of Courts. [3]
Media on their part, reported such judgment, without alerting the public that is fails to appear in the
corresponding electronic court file.
c.July28,2014PostitDecisionandCriminalLevyDecreebyJudgeDavidRosen,
pertainingtoDefendantShulaZakensuspectedfraud.
ThetwopageCriminalLevyDecreewasregisteredintheDecisionsDocketinthepublic
accesssysteminNetHaMishpatasForm13ShulamitZaken,July28,2014DavidRosen.
[Link]
therecordinthepublicaccesssysteminNetHaMishpatrefutestheclaimthatthereisno
waytoseepostitdecisionsfromcomputationalperspective.
3] Judgment record, pertaining to Defendant Olmert, which was published in the Administration of Courts web
site, but fails to appear in Net-HaMishpat electronic file
, ,
.
[Link]

5/28

a)Page No 1

6/28

b) Page No 2.
Figure 4. State of Israel v Zerni et al (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court - Criminal Levy Decree a
two-page record by Judge David Rosen, pertaining to Defendant Shula Zaken in the Holyland file, suspected
as perversion, forgery and/or fraud.
____

7/28

TheCriminalLevyDecree,pertainingtoDefendant9(Zaken),wasrenderedinresponseto
requestbytheStateProsecution,TelAvivDistrict,TaxandEconomyDivision,pursuantto
[Link]:
PageNo.1isNoticetotheGeneralConservatorregardingLevyDecreewhichisa
paperform,whichwascompletedbyhandwriting,affixedwithawetstamp,andthen
[Link],prescribedby
law.
PageNo.2isthecoreoftherecordJuly17,2014PostitDecisionbyJudgeDavid
Rosen,[Link]
record,arectangulartextframe,whichwassuperimposedonanotherelectronicrecord,
whichisthescannedJuly17,2014StateProsecutionRequest.
AnothercomponentonthesamepageistheauthenticationTrueCopyoftheOriginalat
thetopofthepage,whichwasgeneratedasawetstampwithwethandwrittendate
andsignature,whichwereexecutedonaprintoutofthepagepriortoitsfinalscanning.
Combined,therecordwassupposedtoincludethreestepverification:Judge'ssignatureon
theDecree,authenticationoftheDecree,TrueCopyoftheOriginal,bytheChiefClerk,
andsignaturebytheMagistrateoftheCourtontheNoticetotheGeneralConservator.
Infact,[Link],itscontentisfalse,as
detailedbelow.
RequestbytheStateProsecution(Page2)
TheJuly17,2014RequestbytheStateProsecutionisbasedon:
April31,2014Verdict,whereintheDefendantwasconvictedoftakingbribesand
moneylaundering.
Thereareno31daysinthemonthofApril,andthereisnoApril31,2014Verdict
recordamongtherecordsinthiscourtfileinNetHaMishpat.(ConvictionofDefendant9
appearsinaperverted,unsigned,March31,2014record).JudgeDavidRosenalso
clarifiedinhisMarch18,2015PostitDecisioninresponseonDrJosephZernik's
requesttoinspect,thatnoverdictrecord,pertainingtoDefendantZaken,hadbeen
registeredintheelectronicfileinNetHaMishpat.
May15,2015Sentence,whereintheHonCourtapprovedthepleabargainagreement
[Link]
[Link]
NetHaMishpat,andregardingsuchrecordsJudgeRosenalsoexplainedthatitdoesnot
[Link],thereadingoftheSentenceinopencourtwaswidely
reportedbymedia.May15,2015Protocolpages(93519396)werealsopublishedby
Haaretzdaily,buttheProtocol,whichwaspublishedbyHaaretzendswithaDecision,
whichsays:Decisionwillberenderedlatertoday.[4]
PostitDecisionbyJudgeDavidRosen(Page2)
TheJuly17,2014PostitDecision,wassuperimposedontheStateProsecutionRequest.
ThePostitDecisionsays:[Link],which
purportedlyproducedtheLevyDecree,isunsigned.
AuthenticationTrueCopyoftheOriginal(Page2)
TheDecreewaspurportedlyauthenticatedonJuly28,2014,TrueCopyoftheOriginal,by
thehandsignatureofShatz,orSelly(illegible),withneithername,nortitleofthesigner
onthestamp,[Link]
4] 2014-05-15 Protocol, published by Haaretz daily
. ,2014 , 15
[Link]

8/28

signedbytheChiefClerkoftheTelAvivDistrictCourt,ortheMagistrateoftheCourt.
Shatz,orShellywasn'tthenameoftheChiefClerk,ortheMagistrateonthatdate.
Forgeryoftheauthentication,TrueCopyoftheOriginal,bypersons,whoarenotlawfully
authorizedtosignsuchauthentication,isacommonphenomenonintheIsraelicourtstoday,
[Link]
numeroustimesinrecentyears,throughrequests,pursuanttotheFreedomofInformation
ActontheAdministrationofCourts,toascertainthenamesandauthorityofthepersons,
whosignedthepurportedauthenticationonvariouscourtrecordsinthevariouscourts.
Such forgeries also stand contrary to the Hague Apostille Convention (1961), to which Israel is a
party.
NoticeofLevyDecree(Page1)
TheNoticeofLevyDecree,prescribedbylaw,providesadditionalauthenticationofthe
LevyDecree.TheformisdatedJuly28,[Link],signatureoftheMagistrateof
[Link],[Link]
Magistrate'ssignature,JudgeDavidRosen'sstampwasaffixed,upsidedown.
TheentireLevyDecree
Theentirecourtrecordshowsnosignaturebyanyperson,whoisidentifiedasanofficerof
[Link]
recordavalidandeffectual,enforceablecourtrecord.
[Link],whichappearinthepublicaccessDecisions
Docket
Themajorityoftherecords,whichappearinthepublicaccesssystemDecisionsDocketare
notsignedatall.
Suchrecordscanbegenerallydividedintothreetypes:
a)Records,whichweregeneratedandregisteredaselectronicrecordssomeofthese
recordsshownosignatureatall,andothersshowvarioussignaturetypes,asdetailed
[Link],innocasedoesanysuchrecordshowasecure,certifiedsignature,
complyingwiththeIsraeliElectronicSignatureAct.
b)Records,whichweregeneratedaspaperrecords,thenscannedandregisteredas
electronicrecordssomeoftheserecordsshowscannedhandsignatures.
c)Records,whichweregeneratedthroughacombinedprocess,andfinallyregisteredas
electronicrecordstheJuly28,2014CriminalLevyDecreeandPostitDecision(c,
above),areexamplesofsuchrecord.
Records,whichweregeneratedandregisteredaselectronicrecords
Such records, as a rule, are not the original electronic record, but the products of a rendering process.
To the degree that any of these records were originally signed by an electronic signature, it cannot be
determined by the rendering products, which appear in the public access system in Net-HaMishpat.
Some of these records who no signature at all (Example c.) Others show graphic image of
signatures, which were apparently generated, using two different electronic procedures (Examples a.,
b. and a.+b.). Therefore, concern must be raised that the original electronic records were also
generated, using two electronic procedures, and it is doubted that both processes were valid
electronic signature process, if any.

9/28

Sample a. Signature box of Judge David Rosen on February 2, 2012 Decision a graphic image. There is no
way to ascertain a valid secure, certified electronic signature in such electronic record.

Sample b. Signature box of Judge David Rosen on June 9, 2014 Decision, titled Sentencing of Defendant 11
(Feiner), which was entered in the Decisions Docket as Instruction for the Prison Service Supervisor to file
an updated opinion, in re; Avraham Feiner. The signature box says, Rendered today, June 9, 2014, in the
absence of the parties. The signature is a graphic image. There is no way to ascertain a valid secure,
certified electronic signature in such electronic record.

Sample a+b. Signature box of Judge David Rosen on a March 8, 2012 Decision showing double signature.
The differences between the two elements: Type a, on the right, includes the text David Rosen, Judge in san
serif font, while Type b, on the left, shows the same text in serif font. Additionally, Type a increases the
distance between the numbered lines, while in Type b, if does not do that. There is no way to identify a valid,
secure, certified electronic signature in this record. a graphic image. There is no way to ascertain a valid
secure, certified electronic signature in such electronic record.

Sample c. Signature box with no name and no signature, on a May 13, 2014 Decision by Judge David Rosen,
titled: Sentencing of Defendants 1,2,5,7,8,10,12,14,15,16, which was entered as Instruction for the Prison
Service Supervisor to file an Opinion regarding Avraham Feiner. The signature box says: Rendered today,
May 13, 2014, in the absence of the parties. Signature [sic, with neither name, nor signature -jz]
____

Records,whichweregeneratedaspaperrecords,thenscannedandregisteredaselectronic
records
Therecord,showninExampled.,isapparentlyapaperrecord,onwhichJudgeDavidRosen
[Link],therecordwasscannedand
registeredinNetHaMishpatasanelectronicrecords.

10/28

Sample d. Hand written decision, which says: Decision, October 10, 2013, Decree granted as requested,
with a wet hand signature of Judge David Rosen, accompanied by his stamp (No 1), on a scanned paper
document.
____

Records,whichweregeneratedthroughacombinedprocess,andfinallyregisteredas
electronicrecords.
Suchrecordsshowparticularlyseriousperversions,andaresuspectedastruefraud.
TherecordinExamplee.,[Link]
generatedasanelectronicrecord,andthereisnoreasonableexplanation,whyitwasprinted
out,thenscanned,generatingatruncated,amateurishcopyoftheoriginal,whichwasfinally
[Link],includingthe
signaturepage.
Therecord,whichappearsinExamplef.,wasregisteredasForm13,ShulamitZaken,and
istheCriminalLevyDecree,whichisdescribedindetailinc),[Link]
thisrecordissystematictothedegreethatareasonablepersonwouldcometothe
conclusionthatitisafraudulentcourtrecord.

Sample e. The final page of a 685 page record, dated March 31, 2014, which was entered in the Decisions
Docket as Complete Verdict, but fails to appear under the Judgments tab. The record is truncated, is
unsigned, and show no signature box at all at its end. It is obvious that the record, as it appears in NetHaMishpat was generated through a process (including amateurish scanning), which is different from that
which was used to generate most of the other electronic records in this court file.

Sample f. July 17, 2014 Post-it Decision, which says: Decree granted as requested, with no visible
signature at all. The decision itself was not registered under the Decisions Docket in the public access
system. However, the decision appears on a record, which was registered on July 28, 2014, as Form 13,
Shulamit Zaken, and is an electronic record, which was generated through scanning the paper record of the
electronic record of the Post-it Decision.
Figure 5. State of Israel v Zerni et al (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court - Samples a.-f. various
types of signatures, which appear on records, found under the Decisions Docket in the public access system.

_____
Asstatedabove,mostoftherecords,whichappearintheDecisionsDocketinthepublic
accesssystem,shownosignaturewhatsoever,andsomearepervertedinamannerthatis
suspectedasrealfraud.

11/28

Itshouldalsobenoted,thatthedecisionrecordsinNetHaMishpatarenotnumbered,which
facilitatesthedisplayofdifferentdocketsinthepublicaccesssystemandtheOfficeofthe
Clerksystem.
AlsostrikingisthelackofanysignofinvolvementoftheOfficeoftheClerkinthe
[Link]
LevyDecree,describedindetailinc),[Link],True
[Link],thatauthenticationshouldbedeemedaforgery.
Examinationoftherecordsinthepublicaccesssysteminthiscourtfilemustraiseserious
concernsregardingtheintegrityandvalidityofNetHaMishpatasanITsystemforanycourt
records.
Suchstateofaffairs,wherethepubliclyaccessiblerecordsaremostlyinvalidrecords,voids
thepublicrighttoaccesscourtrecords,evenregardingtheminorityofrecords,whichwere
madeaccessibletothepublicinthiscourtfile.
[Link]
JudgeDavidRosen'sdubiousMarch18,2015PostitDecisioninresponsetotheRequestto
Inspectdulyexecutedjudgmentrecords,pertainingtoDefendantsOlmertandZaken,is
showninFigure3,[Link]'tdulyservedontheRequesterwhen
[Link],itwashiddenfromtheRequester,sicneitfails
[Link]'sattentiononly
afterhefiledaRequestforDueProcess,[5]butitwasneverdulyservedontheRequester.
JudgeDavidRosen'[Link]
inothercourtfilesbyotherjudgesintheTelAvivDistrictCourt,andlikewise,inotherIsraeli
courts.
ThemoststrikingexampleinthisrespectisconductofJudgeHagaiBrenneroftheTelAviv
[Link]
socialprotestactivist,[Link],hewrote:
TheTelAvivDistrictCourt,MagistrateHagaiBrenner,obstructedmyaccesstojustice,
[Link]
[Link],JudgeHagaiBrennerissued
afullseriesofpostitdecisions,pertainingtorequeststoinspectthecourtfile,whichwere
neverservedontheRequester,andwhichwerehiddenfromtheRequester,evenafterrepeat
RequestsforDueProcess. [6]

5] 2015-03-24 State of Israel v Zerni (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court: Request for Due Process in
re: Request to Inspect Judgments //
: ( "10291-01-12)
[Link]
6] 2013-07-16 Letter to the Attorney General and criminal complaint, stamped "received" by police, against Tel
Aviv Judge Hagai Brenner and others for obstruction of justice in the case of self-immolated social protest
activist Moshe Silman //
" "
. "
[Link]

12/28

Figure 6. State of Israel v Pinto (43357-09-14) in the Tel-Aviv District Court Judge Oded Mudrik's Decision
on Request No 30 for due service of duly executed decision on Request to Inspect the court file. The
Decision says: My decisions are rendered in the shape and manner in which I believe that I am permitted to
employ... The Decision was received by fax transmission from an unidentified fax machine, the Decision is
unsigned, and it arrived with no accompanying letter from the Office of the Clerk.

____
Anotherstrikingexampleinthisrespect,isJudgeOdedMudrik'sMay18,2015Postit
Decision(Figure6)inStateofIsraelvPinto,[Link]
DecisionalsooriginatesinaRequesttoInspect,andthecourtfilealsooriginatesinoneof
theworstcorruptionscandalsinthehistoryoftheStateofIsrael.
[Link]
MudrikalsorefusedtoserveasignedandauthenticateddecisionontheRequesttoInspect.
Anyreasonableperson,whowouldreadthechapteronServiceofRecordsinlateChief
JusticeYoelSusman'sbookCivilCourtProcedures,wouldconcludethatthetransmission
byfaxfromanunidentifiedfaxmachineofanunsigned,unauthenticatedrecord,cannot
possiblydeemedlawfulserviceofvalidcourtdecision.
JudgeMudrik'sresponseonrepeatRequestsforDueProcessandDueService:Mydecisions
arerenderedintheshapeandmannerinwhichIbelievethatIampermittedtoemploy...
alsounsigned,unauthenticated,andneverdulyserved...
SuchdecisionbyJudgeMudrikreflectstheprevailingbeliefofIsraelijudgestodaythat
theyarepermittedtopervertcourtrecordsandcourtprocess,andsuchconductdoesnot
[Link],andtherefusalofthecourtstodulyservedulysigned
andauthenticateddecisionrecordsaretheroutinetodayinallcourtsinIsrael,fromthelabor
courts,throughthemagistratecourtsandthedistrictcourtstotheSupremeCourt.
ThereisnodoubtthatsuchconductwouldbedeemedviolationofthefundamentalsofDue
Process,andevidenceoffundamentallackofintegrityintheIsraelicourts.
[Link]'s
conductinothercriminalcases
InspectionofthepubliclyaccessiblerecordsinNetHaMishpatinvariousothercriminalcourt
files,whereJudgeDavidRosenpresided,indicatesthathisconductintheHolylandcasewas
unusualinthescopeofperversion,forgeryand/orfraudincourtrecords.
[Link]
InspectionofthecourtrecordsintheHolylandcasewouldleadareasonablepersonto
concludethattheperversionoftherecordsinthiscasecouldnothavebeenperpetratedby
JudgeDavidRosenalone,absentcollusionbyothers,includingcourtpersonnel,the
prosecution,andthePublicDefender'soffice.

13/28

[Link],whichoriginateingovernment
corruption.
TheperversionofrecordsbyJudgeDavidRosenintheHolylandcorruptioncasearenot
[Link],whichoriginatein
[Link],theinitialfindingsofthesurvey,now
underway,indicatethatthecourts,judgesandattorneysareacentralpartnersincorruption
ofgovernmentinIsraeltoday.
[Link],implementationandoperationofNetHaMishpatIT
system
Thefindings,detailedherein,pertainingtotherecordsandregistrationsintheHolyland
corruptioncase,demonstratethefundamentallackofintegrityindesignofNetHaMishpat
system,anditsoperationfortheperversionofcourtrecordsandcourtprocess.
[Link],orlackthereof,oftheOfficeoftheClerkandtheTelAvivDistrictCourt
Thefindings,detailedabove,mustraiseseriousconcernsregardingcompetencyofthe
[Link]
inanycourtinIsrael,wheretheappointmentoftheChiefClerkwasinspected,fromthe
TelAvivRegionalLaborcourttotheSupremeCourtitwasdiscoveredthattheChief
Clerkholdsnovalidappointmentrecordatall.
Thereisnodoubt,thatacourt,whereapersonwithnolawfulappointmentroutinely
appearsasChiefClerkwouldbedeemedanincompetentcourt.
[Link]
governmentcorruption
Itisentirelyunreasonablethatexperiencelegalcorrespondentsareunawareoftheserious
perversionofcourtrecordsandcourtprocessinthecases,relatedtogovernmentcorruption.
However,[Link],legalcorrespondents
reporttothepublic,basedonrecordsthatarenotfoundinthecourtfiles,butinsteadare
distributedtomediabytheSpokesmanoftheAdministrationofCourts(e.g.,theOlmert
JudgmentrecordsintheHolylandcorruptioncase,describedabove).
Evenafterjournalistsarenoticedofsuchdiscrepanciesintheirreporting,theyfailtocorrect
them.
[Link],regardingStrengthening
JudicialIntegrityagainstCorruptionnotethatinnations,wherethejudgesarecorrupt,
mediausuallycolludewiththem.
[Link]?
Atthisstageitisimpossibletoclearlystate,whatthepurposeisoftheperversionsinthe
Holylandcorruptioncase,[Link],
itislikelythatthepurposewastwofold:Ontheonehandhidefromthepublicthetrue
scopeofthecorruptioninwhichthecaseoriginated,andontheotherhanddiscriminate
amongtheDefendantsinthecase.
Summary
1. Inspectionoftherecords,whicharepubliclyaccessible,andtheprocessinvolvedin
RequeststoInspectcourtfilegeneratedmountingevidenceofperversion,forgery,and/or
fraudintherecordsandprocessintheHolylandcorruptioncase,whichstandsincontrast
byscopeandnaturewiththerecordsandprocessinothercourtfiles,whereJudgeDavid
Rosenpresided.
2. DetailedinspectionoftherecordswouldleadareasonablepersontoconcludethatJudge
DavidRoseniswellversedintheminutiaeofcriminalcourtprocedures,butexcelledin
pervertingcourtrecordsintheHolylandcorruptioncase.

14/28

ThefindingsintheHolylandcaseandothercases,pertainingtogovernmentcorruption,
alsoproduceevidenceregardingthefundamentalfraudindesign,implementationand
operationofNetHaMishpatITsystemofthecourtswhichwasestablishedatthecostof
NIShundredsofmillions,throughaprojectofnationalscope,undertheauthorityof
seniorjudicialofficers.
4. Thefindings,outlinedhere,arethediametricaloppositeofmediacoverageofcourt
processinthiscase,andJudgeDavidRosen'sconduct.
5. Thefindings,outlinedhere,underscorethesuspicionoffraudinAttorneyHeliBracha's
letterfromtheAdministrationofCourts,whichmakesludicrousstatementsregardingthe
abilitytoseepostitdecisionsfromcomputationalperspective,regardingrequestto
inspectprocess,regardingserviceofcourtdecisions...
_______
3.

92015 ,


"MICHALTS@[Link] ,ronam@[Link] ,Pniyot@[Link] ,:
Dover@[Link]
: , , ,/

45.
,
7
[ ] , "
) ( ,
" , " "
.
, ,
.
, , . ,
".
' ) - (10291-01-12 ][8
.
, . :
, " , " "
" , ,/ , ,
.
" ,
.
,
7] 2015-08-04 Request for response by Director of the Courts Judge Michael Spitzer on letters by Attorney
Bracha of his office suspected fraud //
, , " -
[Link]
8] 2015-03-01 State of Israel v Zerni (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court: Holyland corruption scandal,
former PM Olmert, and Judge Rosen: Net-HaMishpat records public access, remote terminal //
) (10291-01-12 " : , ,
: ,
[Link]

15/28

'
Human Rights Alert - NGO
"
:
, , , .
_____

'
) (10291-01-12

, , -
.
, .
, .
, ) (2015
.
" " " .
" , .
.
,
.
" .
, ,
: ,
.
. " "

16/28

(
'.1'(102910112)",""
:(,
6,2015,63.(,
22,2015,523.
,,
.

____
523 ,
63 . )(docket
,
. , "
.
:
) ,(2003 ) 2( " :
.
' ) (5917/97
" " " -" .
,
" "] . -[
, ,10
.
, " "
.

, . , ,
. , ,3,4,7 ,
. , " ,
.
,
.
. ,

17/28

'.2'(102910112)",""
:
,,
."":
("13/5/2014"",
.
("09/06/2014 "",
.
(19/06/201419/06/14]["",
.

____
) (
.
, " " ,
. , , ,
".

'.3'(102910112)"","
18,2015,.
,,

18/28

."",.:
,..
_____

,
. 18 ,2015 ,
. -
"" . -
.
, ,
. , , -
.
, -
. " " , .
, ,
...
" "
[9] .
, .
, , ,
...
" . " " " 28 ,2014 ,

, " "
"- -13 28/07/2014 ".
" " " " .
, "
".

9] Judgment record, pertaining to Defendant Olmert, which was published in the Administration of Courts web
site, but fails to appear in Net-HaMishpat electronic file
, ,
.
[Link]

19/28

( ' 1

20/28

( 2
: 4 " " , , ,
,/ .

_____

21/28

 " " ) 9( " , ,

10] 2014-05-15 Protocol, published by Haaretz daily

22/28

" " , . 28
.2014 , " 17 ,2014 , " 15,
2014 , ...
, .
, .


" , . - ,
- -.
. " "
" "
.
:
( ,
, .
, .
( , ,
.
( , -" " "
" 28 ,2014 , ) ,(.

, , , ) .(rendering
,
. ) '( .
, ) ' -' ,'+'( . ,
,
- , .

'.22012,.

'.9,2014,")11(,
""".
,,""09,,2014..
.

23/28

'+'.,20120308.:

' ,,",")(,',,
)(.','.
.

'.,13,2014,
",1,2,5,7,8,10,12,14,15,16 ""
:".:,""13,,2014.]
[.
____

, ,
' , ,
, . , ,
.

'.,10/10/13",,""
"".
____

,
.
' , " " . ,
,
.
' , ,13 , " " -',
. .

24/28

'.685,31,2014,"","
",.,,.
)(
.

'."17,2014,",",.
"".28
,2014,,13,.
'.5'' . ""
.

_____
, " " ,
, .
,
.

. " " ,
-' , , , .
,,
.
, ,
, .
.
18 ,2015 ,
, ' ,3 . ,
. , ,
.
11
" " [ ] ,
.
11] 2015-03-24 State of Israel v Zerni (10291-01-12) in the Tel-Aviv District Court: Request for Due Process
in re: Request to Inspect Judgments //

25/28

 .
" , .
"
. " , .
: " , , ,
" . . ,

" , , ,
[12] .

'6"(433570914)"'30
.:
...,,
.
____

, ) ' (6
" 18 .2015 ,
, , .
.
.
, " " "
" " , , ,
, , ,
.
:
- ... , , ...
-
, . ,

, , ,
.
) ( 10291-01-12 " :
[Link]
12] 2013-07-16 Letter to the Attorney General and criminal complaint, stamped "received" by police, against
Tel Aviv Judge Hagai Brenner and others for obstruction of justice in the case of self-immolated social protest
activist Moshe Silman //
" "
".
[Link]

26/28

 ,
..
.
, ,
, ,/
.
.
-
, , ,
.
.
.
.
, ,
.
. ,

,
.
. , , "

" . / "/ /"
" / .
" " -
.
.
, ,
.
. ,
, )
, (.
, .
. " " "
, .
. ?
, .
: ,
.

.1 , ,/
,
.
.2 - ,
.
.3 , ,
, , .
" , , ,
, .
.4
.

27/28

 .5 "
, " " ,
, " "
...

28/28