Elovitch, Hefetz's remand appeals rejected
After text exchange between judge and attorney indicate apparent coordination in detention of Case 4000 suspects, Bezeq majority shareholder Elovitch and former Netanyahu adviser Hefetz sought release from police custody after their remand was extended until Sunday by new judge.
An appeal filed by the defense attorneys for Bezeq majority shareholder Shaul Elovitch and former Netanyahu family media adviser Nir Hefetz against a decision Monday to keep them in custody until next Sunday as part of the ongoing investigation into the Bezeq affair was rejected Tuesday afternoon.
The decision was taken by judge Yossi Topf after judge Alaa Masarwa already dashed their hopes on Monday evening by refusing to acquiesce to their demands, despite the legal misconduct surrounding their continued detention that had come to light.
“I found it fit to reject the appeal which was based on the abuse of process,” explained judge Topf.
In the probe, also known as Case 4000, in which the two are central suspects, police are investigating suspicions Elovitch and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a quid pro quo relationship in which Bezeq enjoyed regulatory benefits in return for favorable coverage of the Netanyahu family on Walla! News, which is owned by the telecommunications giant.
During the appeal hearing on Tuesday, attorney Yehudit Tirosh, who represents the prosecution, slammed Elovitch, leveling implied criticism at the prime minister as well. "The term 'favorable coverage' is incorrect. It's more about recruiting a prominent website in return for regulatory benefits from the communications minister and Communication Ministry director-general, which are worth to Eurocom Holdings between NIS 680 million to NIS 1 billion in cash," she accused.
The defense teams for both suspects based their claims on an exchange of texts between the judge who presided over remand extensions, Ronit Poznanski-Katz, and an attorney representing the Israel Securities Authority (ISA), Eran Shacham-Shavit, in which the two appear to be coordinating positions about the detainments of the suspects.
Both judge and attorney have been removed from the case, and Elovitch and Hefetz's latest remand extension was determined Monday by a new judge, Alaa Masarwa.
"Every second they are under arrest unlawfully must not happen," said attorney Yaron Kostelitz, who represents Hefetz. "The severity of the incident on Sunday (the text exchange) cannot be exaggerated. Something like this hasn't happened before in the State of Israel. It's enough for me to see the statements from the attorney general and state attorney, who said this incident is contradictory to the basic principles the general prosecution is required to abide."
"When a prosecutor or an investigator exchanges messages via a hidden channel with a judge, and writes to her, 'We'll ask for three days, but you can definitely give two'—justice has been undermined. And you can't argue with that. Justice suffers a critical blow," Kostelitz continued. "The two men here have been arrested in a faulty process. This cannot be under dispute. When severe damage is caused to the principles of justice and fairness, this cannot be accepted."
Attorney Jack Chen, who represents Elovitch, concurred with Kostelitz, saying "There's no need to repeat this again and again for the message to be conveyed. The abuse of process doctrine doesn't deal with the motives of the investigative authority, but with the result. The result is a serious blow to justice and fairness. The public interest demands a remedy—more than just exhausting the process."
Elovitch, Chen said, "doesn't feel well. His detainment conditions are taken advantage of in a way that's meant to break his spirit and lead him to admit to something he hasn't said. We expect the court to serve justice. This sort of incident cannot be resolved by merely tut-tutting and saying this was a grave incident, as if nothing had happened. This thing must have consequences."
Prosecution representative Tirosh responded that while the judge and lawyer's conduct was serious, "it's an exaggeration to say that this is an unlawful arrest or obstruction of the investigation, as the matter is still under examination."
