For the last three years, every three months the police went to court to request a warrant to wiretap the telephone line belonging to businessman Michael Cherney. Backed by Attorney General’s office, the police argued that they had an arrest warrant on Cherney on the suspicion of murder. Now the AG office admits that the warrant never existed.

Let us start at the end. Attorney Shimon Dolan, the head of AG’s economics section, confirmed in his letter to Cherney’s lawyers that “according to the results of the review in the police office, we do not have such a warrant.” This was in response to Cherney’s lawyers’ question: why did the police, with the backing of Attorney General’s office, keep asking the court for the wiretapping order on Cherney, and, most importantly, why did the submitted request mention that there was an arrest warrant on Cherney in Russia “on suspicion of murders and takeover of enterprises.” Murders, no less.

Cherney.
Who is misleading the court?

Attorney Dolan’s response sums up a behind-the-scenes fighting on a grand scale. The police department investigating especially dangerous and international crime (YAKHBAL) conducted a large-scale investigation of Cherney and Gad Zeevi, which concluded in bringing up charges in the Bezek case. Yet lately it has been becoming clear that the YAKHBAL have been passing misleading information to the court, which was used as evidence to extend the wiretapping order ever three months between 1997 and 1999.

For example, some of the police requests said that “in Russia there is an arrest warrant on Cherney on the suspicion of economic crimes committed in the area of aluminum industry”. Other requests mentioned that “in the past, he had an arrest warrant issued in his name in view of his involvement in murders and takeovers of factories.”

Although police claimed that “it has no evidence that the warrant is still valid”, this did not prevent them from submitting repeated requests to wiretap Cherney’s phone.

Here we need to admit that there is no judge in Israel who would refuse a request like this, once he received information about an arrest warrant in Russia on Cherney being accused of murder. So it is unsurprising that for three years one judge after another kept issuing the warrant. it is unsurprising that the government’s legal counsel kept letting them ask for the wiretap. Now it turns out there was nothing like that – no arrest warrant on Cherney in Russia. Without a doubt. In Israel, Cherney has never been suspected of murder. Proof: to this day, he has never been interrogated on the murder suspicion.

None of this belittles the seriousness of the charges against Cherney in the Bezek case. He hired experienced lawyers, who know their stuff. The cited information should shed light on the activities of police and AG office who brought groundless charges of several murders against one man. And not in Israel alone: in 2000, the AG office asked the Swiss authorities to help them in the investigation of several murders where Cherney was allegedly involved. This is how far they went to accuse him of the murder that wasn’t; and let us not forget that neither the police nor the AG office had an arrest warrant or any other reliable information.

Attorney Dolan was not eager to tell the truth, and did so only after repeated requests by Attorney Yaron Firby, who, along with Yakov Weinroth, Yeshua Reznik, and Jacques Henn, represents Cherney. Again and again, they demanded answers to their questions, attempting to prove that all the wiretaps had been illegal.

It is interesting to note the pathetic and awkward excuses provided by YAKHBAL and the AG office in their attempts to hide the fiasco. Rather than admit their guilt and launch an investigation of the people on whose authority the court had been misled, they try to cover up. This is what Dolan wrote, explaining why wiretaps had been submitted: “The secret information with regard to the arrest warrant issued in Russia included the information about the investigation of your client in Russia on the issues of abusing the trust in the area of aluminum industry and deceiving local companies. Besides, the police’s attention was drawn to a Russian TV program that mentioned a warrant order against your client for economic crimes he had committed in aluminum business.”

That is, police armed itself with the information on Cherney that allegedly had been aired in Russia, with suspicions of fraud and abusing trust. Yet why did the police inform the Israeli court of the arrest warrant for suspicions of murder if it did not have such a warrant? Why did it never occur to the police that Cherney and others like him were being persecuted by Vladimir Putin’s government?

Up to now, this information has not been vetted by the government’s legal counsel. What about the Meni Mazoz, the new man in this job – will he authorize an investigation of those responsible? Counsel Mazoz has informed us that he has not had enough time on the job to familiarize himself with the case.

AG’s office informed us that currently it is not about to deal with this matter, since the case is still in court, and, should new issues arise during the trial, the AG’s office will consider them in the appropriate order. They also claimed that the quote above is a partial one and does not reflect the nature of the full statement.

Mizrachi.
Who is involved in the Cyril Kern Affair?

A sad event took place last Sunday. Moshe Mizrachi, the head of the police investigation department, up to his ears in the wiretapping case, attended the press conference called by Internal Security and police heads. The media were told about the range of crime in Israel in 2003. Undoubtedly, the statistics were troubling. Mizrachi could not hold back – unless he had it planned – and claimed at the press conference that the Sharon investigation was stalling due to “external organs”. You know who I am talking about, he said.

Naturally, his words were picked up by the media. After all, this was about legal abuses of Sharon and his sons. Of course, Mizrachi remembered that the next day, Monday, when the newspapers come out, three Supreme Court judges would have a meeting to discuss the request that he be indicted for serious legal criminal abuses. Of course Mizrachi also knew of the triple jeopardy he was facing:

• Adjourned preliminary hearing on Mizrachi’s wiretapping, ordered by the government’s legal counsel Elyachim Rubinshtein, scheduled for March 9, 2004. The Chief of Police Shlomo Aharonishki would be automatically defending Mizrachi. Both Aharonishki and Mizrachi did their best to drag the case. Proof: four months have passed since Rubinshtein published his account on October 23, 2003, while the preliminary hearing will be held (if it is held) only on March 9, and some time will pass before the decision. Yet even after that, the Chief of Police’s decision is only a recommendation that could be written today. The recommendation would be passed to Tzakhi Khanegbi, the Internal Security Minister. In short: it will be a few months before the legal counsel’s order is carried out.
• On May 5, 2004, State Controller Eliezer Goldberg will present his report on the wiretapping case. The draft version has already been shown to al the interested parties to get their testimony. The police has already submitted their testimony to the Controller.
• On Monday, at the Supreme Court, Judges Eliahu Matz, Yakov Tirkel, and Miriam Naor heard the petition from Knesset Member Gilad Ardan, asking to indict Mizrachi for serious criminal violations in the wiretapping case. Acting through his attorney Avi Itzkhak, Ardan reminded the court that even Rubinshteyn’s order to dismiss Mizrachi from his position had never been put into effect. Only now the AG office stated that despite the delay the preliminary hearing would be held in early March. The judges heard the parties for about two hours and in conclusion announced they would make their ruling later – on any other day.

There is a notable symbiosis between Mizrachi and Arbel on one side, and certain media outlets on the other. Evidently, some of the latter, especially Ha’aretz, Yediot Akhronot, and Channel One, choose not to cover the case against Mizrachi and Attorney General Edna Arbel. As for the suspicions (some of which can be countered) spread about by Mizrachi-Arbel’s “friendly” reporters against Sharon and his sons, this week saw new developments. For example, this week, according to Ha’aretz, the police raided the office of Mikhi Lazar, the accountant for Annex Meharim, and found new evidence against Sharon and his sons. According to the front-page report by Barukh Kara, the raid was a follow-up to the investigation conducted in the Caribbean, i.e. a few months ago.

In the first place, there was no raid in Mikhi Lazar’s office. Over three years ago police requested and received the papers dealing with Annex Meharim. In the second place, where’s the news here? Like other media, Ha’aretz has already reported about the evience allegedly obtained in the Caribbean – pieces by Barukh Kara and Amir Oren in December 2003.

The timing of publications raises questions. You don’t have to be a Sherlock Holmes to see what is going on. Sharon’s case (which of course needs to be taken to its conclusion) is being used to “bury” other cases dealing with Arbel and Mizrachi and present them as heroes. Thus all the information shedding light on their case (especially published in this paper) is being presented as if it were part of a conspiracy against them and motivated by the desire to settle accounts with them behind Sharon’s back.