Olmert's ingratitude

District Court Judge David Rozen finally reconvened the court to hear more closing arguments, about a week after he adjourned the Holyland Trial. The participants might as well have been in a class reunion, where someone is always "conspicuously absent." In this case it was former prime minister Ehud Olmert, who is accused of accepting bribes from real estate developers ahead of a massive construction project in Jerusalem during the 1990s, when he was the capital's mayor. There was also a change in the seating arrangement: Olmert's attorney Roy Blecher, known for his impassioned court performances, could be seen in the sixth row, maybe the seventh, having decided to avoid eye contact with another defendant -- OImert's former bureau chief Shula Zaken, whose lawyer, Ofer Bartal, was about to make his closing argument.

Earlier, Zaken's son, Nadav, challenged Olmert to come to the hearing. He should have risen to the challenge and made his presence felt. Olmert, who is still in his prime, is omnipresent when it comes to the jet set's RSVP lists: from Science and Technology Minister Yaakov Peri's birthday bash to former newscaster Emmanuel Rosen's wedding. Bartal went out of his way to say Olmert and Zaken were joined at the hip for years on end. Everything she did was about Olmert, from the moment she woke up to the moment she shut her eyes at night; Zaken's professional life revolved around Olmert. Olmert owed her his presence.

He owed her this common decency because in the 1990s, when his bureau's expenses came under scrutiny, she took the fall. At the time, Zaken claimed she had made an embarrassing error that resulted in the misuse of Likud funds to cover the Olmerts' airfare on an overseas trip. Some 20 years later, when he stood trial for corruption, Zaken once again became the fall guy because she invoked her right to remain silent. She was convicted of breach of trust for her role in defrauding Jewish organizations that had invited Olmert for speaking tours. Zaken would manipulate the invoices so his family members would travel for free alongside him. Had she cooperated with the prosecutors, the Jerusalem District Court, led by President Moussia Arad, would have convicted him. He would have also been found guilty in the Talansky Affair, which involved cash-stuffed envelopes Olmert apparently received from American businessman Morris Talansky (which were ostensibly meant as a campaign donation but which were never reported by his accountant and might have been used, according to prosecutors, for personal matters).

This is the same Zaken who turned her back on Israeli businessman David Appel, who is now serving time in prison; this is the same Zaken who allegedly made sure Olmert's associate Uri Messer would put the envelopes in a safe in his bureau. Zaken would have been sentenced to 11 months in prison had she taken the plea bargain she was offered, but she resisted the pressure and stood by Olmert; now she faces a much tougher sentence.

If Zaken turns on Olmert, it would not necessarily clear her of any wrongdoing. If she accepted bribes from the late state witness Shmuel Dechner, she would have to be properly punished, at which point she would cry over her decision not to plead out the case. She has no right to commit crimes, independently or on Olmert's behalf. Whatever the case, Judge Rozen will have to render his judgment.

But what about Olmert, whose attorney told investigative reporter Dr. Ilana Dayan that Zaken was a "liar"? Why did Olmert authorize this interview? Why should he or his lawyer say that? Has he not heard of the Jewish teaching that "a person's proxy is like him"? Zaken may very well be a liar, but Olmert is probably the last person on earth who has the right to call her that; she may be corrupt, but he is the last person who could take her to task on that. She has sounded one very basic truth: I took my cues from you; you taught me everything. About corruption, of course.

In 1957, then-Chief of General Staff Moshe Dayan was asked why he was on the last convoy out of the Gaza Strip, completing the Israeli pullout from the territory it had captured in the Sinai Campaign. Why had he agreed to be there in that humiliating moment, as Palestinians hurled rocks at the departing Israeli troops? He retorted that senior officers need to treat failure and glory just the same. Olmert admires Dayan but has apparently refused to heed his advice.