][BilingualrecordEnglishbelow

FiledbyonJuly02,2017to026759648

"5514/16 ",'

:'
,33407
0773179186:
"joseph.zernik@hrango.org:

25,2017,
,,
252017,
,:
.122,2017,.
,:
"""19,2017,
, .,
, ,.,
".
,"...
.2
:
(29,2017,""""
.
(07,2017,.
)("",
(1):(2).
" ".

.
(07,2017,""",22.5.2017
:,(29.5.2017).(6.6.2017)
, .""
"",
.,""""
.,"""",
"".,""
,)(,.
"",""
)(.
(11,2017,)"("
".

1/5
25,2017,
 ",.,
.
("""":
15.5.2017.
)(.
,""
""";
".
(:
.

,.
.
.
" , ,
)
(.
,152017,. .3
25,2017,: .4
( ""
2017.6.6 ""
.
,:?
)(.
""?
(".
?""?
"",?
(,,,
)(.
?""?""
,?
,. .5
, ,,
""
"[1].
, 252017,
.

____________ 02,2017,
'
,

1 CourtofRecord

2/5
25,2017,
 _____

IntheSupremeCourtoftheStateofIsrael

OmetzvAttorneyGeneraletal 5514/16

RequesterofInspection: JosephZernik,PhD
POBox33407,TelAviv
Fax:0773179186
Email:joseph.zernik@hrango.org

RequestforClarificationsofPresidingJusticeMiriamNaorsJune25,2017Decision
regardingDisqualificationforaCause
TheRequesterofInspectionininstantcourtfile,JosephZernik,PhD,fileshereinRequestfor
ClarificationspertainingtoPresidingJusticeMiriamNaorsJune25,2017decisionininstant
courtfile,regardingurgentrequestforimmediateappointmentofanewjudicialpanelforthe
ancillaryprocessesoftherequeststoinspectininstantcourtfile,forthefollowingreasons:
1. OnMay22,2017,myDisqualificationforaCause,filedintheancillaryprocessofrequest
toinspect,wasenteredininstantcourtfile.TheDisqualificationforaCauseoriginatedin
thejudicialpanelsconduct,whichwasperceivedasgimmickry,lackingsincerityand
integrity:AccesstoinspecttheoriginalpaperrecordsoftheFebruary19,2017Decisionand
ConditionalDecree,whichhadbeenpublished,wasunlawfullydenied.Instead,unsigned,
unauthenticated,invalidprintoutsfromtheCourtsITsystemwererepeatedlymailedtothe
RequesterofInspection.Moreover,thejudicialpanelfailedtoruleonrepeatrequeststo
exercisetheinspectioninthepapercourtfileincompliancewiththeletterandthespiritof
thelaw.Thatinacourt,whichhaddeclaredtherighttoinspectafundamental
principleinanydemocraticregimeconstitutions,suprastatutory.
2. Conductofthejudicialpanel,pertainingtodecisionontheDisqualificationforaCauseis
perceivedascontinuationofthegimmickry,lackingsincerityandintegrity:
a)OnMay29,2017,apervertedJudgmentrecordwasenteredinthemainprocess
PetitionforaConditionalDecreepurportedlyasdecisionontheDisqualificationfora
Cause.
b)OnJune07,2017myrequestforreceiptofadulysignedandcertifiedcopyofsuch
recordwasentered.Therequestnotedthattherewasnowaytoascertain,whethersuch
recordwasanauthenticcourtrecord,ormerelyadraft,andnoticedtheCourtofthe
seriousdoubleperversioninsuchrecord:(i)Thejudicialpanelhadnotdisposedofthe
Disqualification.(ii)TheentryofJudgmentinthemainprocesseffectivelydisposedof
themainpetition.Anyfurthermotionsanddecisionswouldbemerelypostjudgment
processesTothisdate,nodecisionhasbeenenteredonmyJune07request.
c)OnJune07,2017,IreceivedbyfaxaDecisionrecord,pertainingtoMay22,2017
Disqualification,theendofwhichsays:RenderedonMay29,2017,Amendedon
June06,2017.Suchrecordisalsopervertedonitsface,sincetheRequesterofthe
Disqualificationstillfailstoappearinitsheader.Ithasalsofailedtobeenteredtothis
dateintheDecisionsDocketininstantcourtfileintheelectronicpublicaccesssystem,
whilethepervertedJudgmentremainsentered,withnonoteofitsamendment.
3/5
,2017,25
 Similarly,whiletherenderingoftheJudgmentanditssendingtothepartieswere
enteredunderEventsLog,therenderingoftheDecisionanditssendinghavenot
beenenteredtothisdate.Additionally,theDecisionrecordwasfaxedunsigned,with
noauthenticationletter,fromanunidentifiedfaxnumber.Therefore,suchtransmission
cannotbedeemeddueservice,andsuchDecisionrecordcannotbedeemedan
authenticcourtrecordatall.
d)OnJune11,2017,myrequest(No23)wasenteredUrgentrepeatrequestforreceipt
ofadulysignedandcertifiedcopyofadulymadeandentereddecision,pertainingto
disqualificationforacause.Therequestdetailedthevariousperversions,outlined
above,andprovidedtheCourtanopportunitytocorrectthem.However,tothisdate
suchperversionshavenotbeencorrected,andnodecisionwasenteredpertainingto
requestNo23.
e)BoththeAmendedDecisionandtheJudgmentnoteintheirend:
TheOfficeoftheClerkshallbringupthefileforreviewandrenderingofdecisionon
theMay15,2017motion,oncetheDecision(re:Disqualification)become
unappealable.
However,inviewofalltheabove,aseriousvagueandambiguouscircumstanceswere
createdininstantcourtfile,regardingboththepervertedJudgmentandtheamended
Decision.Neitherofthetwoabovereferencedrecordscanbedeemedavalidcourt
record,whichdisposestheDisqualificationforaCauseininstantcourtfile.
f)RelativetotheDisqualificationforaCause,JusticeDanzigerandhiscolleagueswrite:
Ourdecisionsregardinginspectionofthecourtfilerecordswererenderedwithno
biasanddonotshowanyconcernofbias.TheRequester'srequeststoinspectwere
grantedinamannerthattherecordsweresenttohimdirectlybymail...withalldue
respect,itdoesnotindicateanyjustificationforDisqualificationforaCause.
Suchpretextisperceivedasanotheractofgimmickry.Therighttoinspectjudicial
recordsiswellknowninthecivilizedworldforcenturies.Purportedexerciseoftheright
toinspectbydirectmailingofinvalidrecords,whiledenyingaccesstoinspectthe
originalrecordsinthecourtfile,wouldbenodoubtperceivedbyinternationalobservers
aslackofintegrity,ifnotrealfraud(fraudofthetypethatiscalledbyexpertsShell
GameFraud).
3. Therefore,onJune15,2017IfiledwithPresidingJustineMiriamNaortherequestfor
appointmentofanewpanel.
4. PresidingJusticeMiriamNaorsJune25,2017decisionincludessomeunclearstatements:
a)Inordertoprovidethecompletepicture,itshouldbenotedthatthedecisionwasfirst
issuedunderthetitleJudgment,andthatonJune06,2017,thetitlewasamendedto
DecisionandthecorrespondingchangeswereimplementedinITsystemoftheCourt.
TothisdateIhaventfound:Whereweresuchchangesmade?Surelynotinthepublic
DecisionsDocket(Figure).IstheSupremeCourtmaintainingdoublebooksforDecisions
Docket?

4/5
,2017,25
Figure.OmetzvAttorneyGeneraletal(5514/16)publicDecisionsDocket(downloadedon
July02,2017):thelatestdecisions,enteredinthedocketare:a)June25,2017Decision
(PresidingJusticeMiriamNaorsdecision,pertainingtorequesttoappointanewpanel),b)
June19,2017Decision(JusticeYoramDanzigerdecisiongrantingextension),c)May29,
2017Judgment(thepervertedpanelsdecisiononthedisqualificationforacause).TheJune
06,2017amendedDecisionondisqualificationfailstoappearinthedocket.
02)""(5514/16)".
)2017,25(::(2017,
)2017,19(,(,
)2017,29(,(,
2017,06"".(
.
______

b)First,itshouldbenotedthatthePanelsdecisiononthedisqualificationisunappealable
anylonger.
Whichpanelsdecisionsisunappealable?ThepervertedJudgment,whichisenteredin
thedocket?OrperhapsthatamendedDecision,whichfailstoappearinthedocket?
c)TherequestbeforetheCourtisnothingbutanappealofdisqualificationdecision.
Iamnolegalscholar,buttothebestofmyunderstanding,appealcanonlyoriginateinan
authenticcourtdecision.Whichcourtdecisioncouldsuchappealpossiblyoriginatein?The
pervertedJudgment,whichisenteredinthedocket?Orperhapsthatamended
Decision,whichfailstoappearinthedocket?
5. ThematterathandpertainstotheSupremeCourtoftheStateofIsraelandadecisionofits
PresidingJustice.Thevagueandambiguousnatureofthedecisionsininstantcourtfile,
andfurthermore,thevagueandambiguousnatureofthePresidingJusticesdecisionina
fundamentalmattermaintenanceofadocketraiseseriousconcernsregarding
competenceoftheSupremeCourtasaCourtofRecord.
Therefore,PresidingJusticeMiriamNaorshouldclarifyherJune25,2017decisionpertaining
todisqualificationforacauseandappointmentofanewjudicialpanelforreviewingthe
requeststoinspectininstantcourtfile.

Today,July02,2017 ______________
JosephZernik,PhDRequesterofInspection
InProSeunrepresented

5/5
,2017,25