Coalition lawmakers moved to advance a bill on Tuesday to repeal the criminal offenses of fraud and breach of trust from the criminal code, which are the charges that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing in his ongoing trial.
Barak Medina, a professor of law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, explained that the bill poses a significant risk of corruption.
"The Knesset should have legislated what defines a conflict of interest and how to handle it when it arises. Right now, all they are trying to do is remove the criminal prohibition without establishing a new norm, and they want to limit the scope of conflicts of interest only to cases involving first-degree relatives."
"The fundamental problem is that the existing arrangements [do not address the issue of] conflicts of interest," Medina explained. "Everything has been developed through case law, and that [poses] a major risk for corruption."
"It is not ideal to use criminal law to regulate the actions of administrative authorities, but given our challenging reality, it has become unavoidable," he added.
Medina further noted that the bill was problematic even outside of the context of Netanyahu's trial.
"In principle, even without Netanyahu’s trial, this law is highly problematic. It enables corruption and undermines deterrence among public servants from abusing their powers. There is a significant lack of norms in this area."
Legal scholar says Knesset fraud bill highly problematic in light of Netanyahu trial
He added that, in his professional opinion, the courts would not allow coalition members to apply the new law to current cases, such as Netanyahu's trial. Netanyahu was indicted in 2020 on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in three cases: 1000, 2000, and 4000.
"If [lawmakers] try to apply it immediately to ongoing cases, I find it hard to imagine the court accepting such a move. The clause that removes canceled offenses only applies to special circumstances, offenses that are no longer relevant, and shifting social values." The professor explained that the classic example of Israel's criminal code being changed based on "shifting social values" was the 1988 repeal of Israel's ban on homosexuality.
"[Crimes] committed due to conflict of interest are still considered unacceptable. This law is specifically aimed at solving Netanyahu's problem. It’s quite clear that the High Court of Justice will rule that Netanyahu’s case doesn’t fall under this law because of the conflict of interest."
Medina explained that the criminal codes require amendment, but that this should be done through the proper channels.
"There is certainly a need to amend the law, but it should be done through a public committee that will examine all the implications, especially with viable alternatives. We cannot simply repeal the law and hope for the best. The situation isn’t that the public service operates without conflicts of interest, and only public representatives are being targeted."
"The way forward is not to simply remove the clause, but rather to establish effective alternative restrictions, such as reporting conflicts of interest, transferring authority, and strengthening the role of the legal advisor in defining what constitutes a conflict of interest."
Jerusalem Post Staff contributed to this report.