
The Head of Investigations and Intelligence in the Israel Police, Boaz Balat, decided not to request approval from the Attorney General, Gali Baharav-Miara, to open an investigation against the Acting President of the Supreme Court, Judge Yitzhak Amit.
Following an examination by Chief Balat, it was found that "there is no evidence and no basis for suspicion that requires the Attorney General to request a criminal investigation."
Justice Minister Yariv Levin filed a complaint with the Justice Ministry's legal department against Amit, claiming that "the series of events allegedly portrays a systematic conduct knowingly by Judge Amit violating the ethical rules prohibiting sitting in a conflict of interest."
The storm against Judge Amit began after a report in Yedioth Ahronoth claimed that he was involved in several legal proceedings around a property he owns in Tel Aviv, under the name Goldfriend. According to the report, Amit did not report these proceedings to the judicial administration as required by law, and even adjudicated in cases involving attorneys representing him.
Amit claims this was done in good faith and without his knowledge.
Levin, who was required to nominate the President of the Supreme Court for voting in the Committee for the Selection of Judges, wrote that there is no choice but to postpone the committee meeting due to the events in which Amit is suspected. "The committee should conduct a thorough investigation regarding any complaint, claim, or reservation submitted concerning a candidate for the position," Levin argued.
Conversely, Amit responded to Minister Levin, emphasizing that he did not act in a conflict of interest. "Contrary to the presentation in the article, there was no obstacle to judging in cases where the Tel Aviv Municipality was a party to the proceedings. Therefore, the claim of a conflict of interest is unfounded."
Regarding the use of the false name, Amit wrote: "Regarding the alleged 'concealment' - the reason Judge Amit appears in proceedings under his previous family name is likely because the ownership details were taken from the land registry, where this name appears. In the power of attorney given by the judge to his brother, it was explicitly written Yitzhak Amit, not Yitzhak Goldfriend, so the claim that Judge Amit 'concealed' his identity lacks any basis, is unfounded, and has no merit."