The corruption cases against former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert are like an overflowing fountain. They never seem to end. Attorney Eliad Shraga from the Movement of Quality Government in Israel petitioned the High Court of Justice to allow Olmert's former personal assistant, Shula Zaken, to testify against Olmert in the Rishon Tours affair, over his dealings with Moshe Talansky and the Holyland affair, before the courts issue their rulings.
The prosecution objected, Shraga requested some legal assistance, and here is the surprise: Attorney Avinoam Segal-Elad, representing the prosecution, requested a quick chat with the judges without the presence of attorneys Ofer Bartal and Roi Blecher, who represent Zaken and Olmert respectively.
Naturally, the media's representative, Yuval Yoaz of the Globes financial paper, objected to this meeting. But in actuality the proper decision was made: The prosecution presented the gist of the secret document in its possession to the judges, while the rest, especially Olmert, were curious as to what it entailed.
What does the document entail? The High Court judges have placed a gag order on revealing its content. This is not ideal in a democracy predicated on the transparency of its courts, but in this case this is a necessary evil. We are left to speculate, mainly about the details Zaken has already provided the police in her previous testimony.
Is there now fresh interest in Olmert's conduct? Will another indictment be submitted, or is this unnecessary? There are questions. Only the prosecution will make the call when the time comes.
The incident on Monday at the High Court is part of the process of repetition in any investigation, in which the need to conceal the justification for doing so is occasionally required.
A case is constantly learned and re-learned; after all, the arrests of former Israel Defense Forces Spokesman Avi Benayahu and former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi's former bureau chief Erez Weiner were essential to the investigation of Ashekenazi's conduct, even if ultimately the case could have proceeded without them. Indeed, it is also likely that the case of the sexual harassment claims against Energy and Water Minister Silvan Shalom will need to go through several stations, the justification for which will not always be immediately clear, as long as justice is served at the final destination.
This is currently the condition of Olmert's criminal investigations, publicly deliberated on for many years in the typical Israeli fashion. Now, as they near their conclusion, it seems fitting to end the ride with Zaken's testimony. In the past she refused to help. Now she is ready. And not just ready either, she is willing to offer it for nothing in return -- a free testimony, or at the most one given under uncertain conditions in the hope that if she gives she could also receive.
The proposal of Zaken testifying has been discussed multiple times. We can assume that the High Court judges will not accept the just petition filed by the Movement of Quality Government in Israel, but the prosecution can still utilize Zaken's willingness to testify uncoerced by the court.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו