NGO to Nitzan: Make sure Zaken submits all evidence against Olmert in court

There is rampant speculation about what the prosecution will do with evidence which it has obtained from Zaken.

Shaula Zaken embraces lawyer 370 (photo credit: Emile Solomon/ Haaretz)
Shaula Zaken embraces lawyer 370
(photo credit: Emile Solomon/ Haaretz)
An NGO on Wednesday sent a letter to State Attorney Shai Nitzan requesting that he ensure that all of Shula Zaken’s testimony and evidence against Ehud Olmert be brought forward in court.
The Movement for the Quality of Government in Israel said it was responding to reports by anonymous sources in the media that there were pressures on Zaken not to testify about potential allegations that he had obstructed justice and tried to convince her not to testify against him in the Holyland trial.
There has been rampant speculation about what the prosecution would do with evidence, including cassette tapes, which it obtained from Zaken in a plea bargain following Olmert’s conviction for bribery in the Holyland trial on Monday.
Reports have ranged from dropping the issue, since Olmert has already been convicted of bribery and especially since Holyland Judge David Rozen seemed unimpressed with the plea bargain, to filing a new indictment against Olmert as well as trying to use the evidence against him in the Supreme Court appeal against his 2012 acquittals in the Jerusalem corruption trial and in the April 28 Holyland sentencing hearing.
The Justice Ministry refused to confirm or deny any of the reports other than to note that at this time there is a criminal investigation against Olmert on the new charges but no indictment as of yet.
The NGO told Nitzan that bringing Zaken’s evidence forward in court was important to unveil the full truth about Olmert’s actions and arrive at the truth regarding the allegations.
It added that unveiling all possible public corruption connected to Olmert and his bureau was crucial for rooting out corruption from the public sector.
Finally, the NGO noted that though its petition to the High Court of Justice to compel the state to move forward with a deal with Zaken was rejected, ultimately the state decided to cut a deal with Zaken once the tapes were produced, and that the state should not step back from having finally made the right choice.