(A7) The senior official whose spyware was installed on his cell phone is the former director general of the Communications Ministry and state witness Shlomo Filber, Channel 13 News reported Thursday night.
The Justice Ministry is investigating why the police used the software only against him. It should be noted that only last week the police misled the prosecution, denying the use of anti-spyware software in Netanyahu’s cases, and only after the prosecution’s insistence was another investigation conducted and the police admitted the use of the software against Filber.
Following the publication, a crisis of trust developed between the prosecution and the police, which claimed that the software was only used against Filber. The prosecution was not convinced. Therefore, the state required the police to re-examine what measures were involved in the cases. At the same time, the prosecution promised Netanyahu’s lawyers answers early next week.
Yesterday, Channel 13 News reported that police used an intrusive spyware program without the permission of one of the main people involved in the cases of former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to an investigation currently underway at the Justice Ministry.
According to the report, extensive mobile content that includes photos, phone numbers, correspondence history and use of various apps was extracted by the police without a proper warrant.
Attorney Jacques Chein, representing Shaul and Iris Elovitch, responded: “If there is truth in the report, it is a serious crime. Another expression of breaking all boundaries in the investigation against the Elovitch couple that we have been warning about for years. It is clear that in a law-abiding state there must be far-reaching significance and there is no doubt that the last word on the subject has not been said.”
Exposure has the potential to significantly delay the highest profile trial in the country. If the person who was spied on is a witness who has already testified in court – then the attorneys for the relevant defendants can now request a repeat cross-examination. If it is a witness who did not testify, then the attorneys may request a postponement in order to properly review the material. All this is subject to a court decision.
The Police said in response: “In accordance with the publication of the Attorney General’s decision regarding the appointment of the inspection team, the police will cooperate fully and transparently with any inspection required by the staff, and naturally will not go into detail.”
