Worse yet, the Judgment in Lori Shem-Tov's appeal in the Tel-Aviv District Court appears as another example of a fake court record - invalid, deceitful and fraudulent.
A Request to Inspect, which has been filed this week in the Tel-Aviv District Court notes: [4]
a) The record states that the judgment was read in front of the three judge panel, assigned to the case - as required by law. However, eye witnesses reported that only two judges were present at the hearing - Judge Raanan Ben-Yosef, who was indeed assigned to the case, and Judge Avraham Heiman, who was not assigned to the case at all.
b) Court Calendars show false entries , indicating that all three judges were present in the hearing. Court Calendars are one of the "Books of Courts", which define the lawful hearings of the court. Therefore, false Court Calendars in this case undermine the validity of the hearing and the judgment.
c) Israeli law requires that Defendant's Counsel be present in all hearings. The Judgment record itself notes that Lori's Counsel was not present in the hearing.
d) Today, there is no way for the public and parties in court cases in Israel to determine the validity of court records. Published judicial record bear only "graphic signatures" (cut and paste images), which are held invalid by the judges themselves. At the same time, the judges routinely deny access to inspect their electronic signatures, which are deemed by the judges the valid signatures . Review of the judges electronic signatures in a series of other cases shows that judges routinely generate, serve, and publish unsigned, fake court records. [5]
Figure. Inspection of the electronic signature of a Jerusalem Magistrate Court decision, recently rendered, served, and published, shows "The record signature is invalid". Israeli judges routinely engage in such deceit - generating, serving, and publishing decisions and judgments records, which they themselves hold invalid "drafts".
___
The law in Israel is clear: "Any person is permitted to inspect decision records, which are not lawfully prohibited for publication". Moreover, the 2009 Judgment of the Israeli Supreme Court [Association for Civil Rights in Israel v Minister of Justice et al ( 5917-97) ] further clarifies that no Request to Inspect is required for inspection of published judicial records. The same Judgment also declaring that such inspection is "a fundamental principle in any democratic regime... constitutional, supra-statutory". The law in the US is similar - as clarified by the US Supreme Court in the landmark case of the Nixon tapes - Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589 (1978)
Regardless, a long series of attempts over the past several years to exercise the right to inspect judicial records in various courts, including the Supreme Court, documented that the courts disregard the law, and deny access to inspect the authentic judicial records, even after they were published.
The denial of access to inspect electronic signatures of judicial records is particularly troubling, in the wake of the "Fabricated Protocols" scandal of 2011. In that scandal, Tel-Aviv District Court senior Judge Varda Alshech falsified court records in order to retaliate against an attorney, who had appeared before her. Investigation concluded that Judge Varda Alshech had never electronically signed the false records, and therefore, the records were considered merely "drafts"... However, that fact could not be distinguished by others involved in the matter. Judge Alshech has never been held accountable... [6]
Israeli attorneys often claim that they do not understand the E-sign Act (2001), and the matter is insignificant. Such attorneys should be deemed incompetent at best.
The Israel Bar Association acts as an agent, providing attorneys the electronic signature instruments, as well as software for their execution and inspection (denied to the public at large). The Israel Bar Association was also the complainant in the Judge Varda Alshech scandal. And yet, even after the Judge Varda Alshech scandal the Bar has never taken any action to stop the faking of court records by judges. Therefore, the Bar, a statutory body, should be deemed complicit in this matter.
The judges, as a group, should be held the perpetrators. Electronic systems in the Israeli courts were developed, established, and are operated by the judiciary (as is the case in the US) with no adequate public oversight. However, no competent judge can be ignorant of the fraud routinely perpetrated in the operation of these systems.
In contrast, Hebrew University Computer Science Professor Amnon Shashua, co-founder of Mobileye, [7] has recently wrote about research into computer fraud in the Israeli courts "very important work".
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
