12-04-10 the judge alsheikh affair – “reconstructed transcript” in the tel-aviv district court...

8/2/2019 12-04-10 The Judge Alsheikh Affair Reconstructed Transcript in the Tel-Aviv District Court _ Globe

1/5

Human Rights Alert (NGO) Joseph Zernik, PhD "PO Box 31440, Jerusalem 91313, Israel;[email protected] 91313; ,31440"

12-04-10 The Judge Alsheikh Affair Reconstructed Transcript in the Tel-Aviv District

Court _ GlobesJudge Vardah Alsheikh is currently presiding in some key corporate/financial cases. The Israel BarAssociation filed a disciplinary complaint, pertaining to the falsification of a transcript of proceeding inAlsheikhs court. In retaliation, the counsel for the Administration of Courts threatened to initiate complaintagainst the representative of the Bar Association.

Attached:

# Record Page#

1 The Judge Alsheikh Affair Reconstructed Transcript in the Tel-Aviv District Court _ Globes [English translation jz] 2

2 The Judge Alsheikh Affair Reconstructed Transcript in the Tel-Aviv District Court _ Globes [Hebrew original] 4
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/5

Page 2/3 April 23, 2012

[Globes logo - jz]

The Judge Alsheikh Affair: The Bar Association Supports Attorney

Efraim Naveh

The entire leadership of the Bar stands behind the Chairman of the Tel-

Aviv Bar, Attorney Efraim Naveh, who filed the complaint against Vardah

Alsheikh and rebuke the Counsel of the Administration of Courts, Attorney

Barak Lazer.

The affair of the Reconstructed Transcript of the Tel-Aviv District Court Judge Vardah Alsheikh isback in the headlines: The entire leadership of the Bar stands behind the Chairman of the Tel-Aviv

Bar, Attorney Efraim Naveh, who filed the complaint against Vardah Alsheikh with the Inspector of

the Judiciary Eliezer Goldberg.

In parallel, the Bar committees in an unusual cooperative action rebuke the Counsel of the

Administration of Courts, Attorney Barak Lazer, who suggested impropriety in the conduct of

Attorney Naveh.

The affair started in September 2011, in a proceeding conducted in the court of Alsheikh, regarding

receivership of Abraham Jacobson. The debts of Jacobson approximate NIS 36 millions, and themain debt holder is Bank Hapoalim. Attorney Argaz is married to another debt holder of Jacobson,

and during the proceeding, he requested to be appointed as a special Master in the case.

A contentious dialogue developed between Alsheikh and Argaz during the proceeding, and afterAlsheikh informed him that if he would make the request, he would be charged with expenses, Argaz

withdrew his request. Later during the proceeding, stormy discussion developed, after Alsheikhclaimed that Argaz concealed from her the updated position of Bank Hapoalim in the case.

Alsheikh then dictated sharp words for the record against Argaz, and also informed him that thetranscript would serve for filing a complaint against him with the Ethics Committee of the Bar

Association by the Administration of Courts. However, the copy of the transcript, which was later

filed with the complaint, included 36 changes and additions, compared to the original transcript, a

copy of which Argaz had obtained from the Court Reporter of Alsheikh, about 30 minutes followingthe conclusion of the proceeding. Therefore, Argaz could provide a detailed comparison of the

original transcript with the reconstructed transcript. Consequently, the Bar Association filed a

request for clarification with the Administration of Courts.

Later, the Ethics Committee of the Tel-Aviv Bar Association, chaired by Attorney Naveh, decided toclose the complaint of Judge Alsheikh against Attorney Argaz. In parallel, Attorney Naveh filed a

complaint with the Inspector of the Judiciary against Judge Naveh, which is still under review.

However, the Counsel of the Administration of Courts, Attorney Barak Lazer, distributed a letter to allsenior bodies of the justice system, in which he sharply criticized the conduct of Attorney Naveh, and

accused him of using his position as Chair of the Ethics Committee for political purposes.

Material concern has emerged, wrote Lazer about two months ago in his letter, of conflict ofinterests in the Tel-Aviv Ethics Committee, which does not enable it to handle the complaint [of

Alsheikh against Argaz jz], since the Chair of the Ethics Committee is also the President of the Tel-


3/5

Page 3/3 April 23, 2012

Aviv Bar Association, and he is a politician, who is a politician, who is carrying the banner of fighting

the courts and the judiciary at any cost.

Lazer also threatened that the Administration of Courts considers filing a Disciplinary Complaint

against Attorney Naveh himself.

In an unusual step, the Central Committee and the National Council of the Israel Bar Associationconducted last week a joint meeting, in which it was decided to provide full backing for Attorney

Naveh and to rebuke Attorney Lazer for distributing the accusations.

The Central Committee and the National Council emphasize the independence of the ethics

committees of the Bar, and back the ethics committees and their members in performing their dueresponsibilities, the joint decision stated. The Committee and the Council entirely reject the

accusations of Lazer against Naveh, and severely view the inappropriate words of against him

[Naveh- jz] and the accusations of contempt of the court and misuse of the responsibilities of the

Ethics Committee.

The joint decision of the leadership bodies of the Israel Bar Association was distributed to the samerecipients of the original letter of Attorney Lazer, and therefore, it was also addressed to Inspector

Goldberg, to the President of the Supreme Court, Justice Asher Grunis, to Minister of Justice Yaakov

Neeman, to the Director of the Administration of Courts Michael Spitzer, and others.


4/5


5/5

12-04-10 the judge alsheikh affair – “reconstructed transcript” in the tel-aviv district court...

Documents