Human Rights Alert (NGO)

Joseph Zernik, PhD

PO Box 33407, Tel Aviv, Israel
Fax: 077-3179186 Email: joseph.zernik@hra-ngo.org

Attachment9.3Zernik,J.,NewFraudulentITSystemsintheIsraeli
Courts:UnannouncedRegimeChange?,EuropeanConferenceon
EGovernment(2015)
InRE:ROMANZADOROVaUkrainiancitizendetainedinIsrael
Filedwith:
WorkingGrouponArbitraryDetention
c/oOfficeoftheHighCommissionerforHumanRights
UnitedNationsOfficeatGeneva,Switzerland
Byemail:wgad@ohchr.org,urgent-action@ohchr.org

1/1

Digitally signed
by Joseph
Zernik, PhD
Date: 2015.02.20
11:14:36 +02'00'

Fraudulent New IT Systems of the Israeli Courts - Unannounced Regime Change?

Joseph Zernik, PhD
Human Rights Alert (NGO), Tel-Aviv, Israel
joseph.zernik@hra-ngo.org
Abstract: Validity, integrity, and impacts of the new IT systems of the Israeli courts, implemented in the
decade of the 2000s, are examined. The report is based in part on the Human Rights Alert, NGO, (HRA)
submission for the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of human rights in Israel by the Human Rights Council
(HRC) of the United Nations (UN) which, following professional HRC staff review, was incorporated into the
HRC UPR report (2013) with the note: "Lack of integrity in the electronic record systems of the supreme court,
the district courts and the detainees' courts in Israel". The current report is also based on the findings of the
State Ombudsman's Report (2010), which noted that system development failed to comply with state law and
standards. System analysis reveals development and implementation with no lawful authority, servers of
unverified identity, and invalid implementation of electronic signatures, authentication procedures, authorities
and permissions. Data mining reveals widespread issuance of invalid, falsified, simulated, and/or forged
judicial records. Case studies document the implications of the operation of such conditions. The systems
stripped judicial records of any validity and authenticity. Such systems, implemented through a costly, longterm project, overseen by key national judicial figures, are unlikely to be the outcome of oversight, or human
error. The systems should be viewed as suspension of the law of the land, or denial of access to the civil courts.
As such, they represent a regime change, or a constitutional crisis in a nation with no constitution. Corrective
measures are proposed, calling for Publicity of the Law transparency - and for the Separation of Powers
placing the development and implementation of such systems under accountability to the legislature. IT
experts should assume more prominent duties in the safeguard of civil society in our era.
Keywords: e-justice, human rights, courts, prisons, banking regulation, State of Israel.
1. Introduction
The courts worldwide have implemented in recent decades IT systems for efficient management of court
cases, electronic filing by parties, and public access to court records. United Nations reports on Strengthening
Judicial Integrity Against Corruption (2000, 2001) encourage the process. No doubt, such systems could have
improved the transparency and integrity of the judicial processes. However, The transition to electronic
administration of the courts amounts to a sea change in the operations of the offices of the clerks.
The office of the clerk is central the maintenance and safeguard of valid court records, through procedures
that have evolved over centuries under paper administration of the courts. On the other hand, historical
review finds that corruption of the offices of the clerks is correlated with corruption of the courts themselves
(Messinger, 2002).
The current report is based in part on the Human Rights Alert, NGO, (HRA) submission to the United Nations
Human Rights Council (HRA, 2013), which was incorporated into the Professional Staff Report (2013) of the
Council's Periodic Review with the note: lack of integrity of the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the
district courts and the detainees courts in Israel. Instant report provides: a) Online Appendix I - an expanded
version of the current report with links to online references and records, and b) Online Appendix II - HRA
submission (2013), sections of which are referenced within the text (e.g., HRA C1e).
1.1 Office of the clerk
The authority, duties and responsibilities of the chief clerk of the court in the State of Israel were defined in a
series of laws and respective regulations (HRA C.1). However, the laws and regulations leave considerable
amount of ambiguity. On such background, absent unambiguous definition of the authority, duties and
responsibilities of the chief clerk and the respective procedures, invalid IT systems were to be developed and
implemented. It is noteworthy that the Israeli courts themselves ruled that a court, operating with no lawful
office of the clerk, is an incompetent court.
2. Methods
2.1 IT system analysis and data mining

The systems are analysed by review of the their implementation and operation in various courts. Data mining
is largely conducted using the inherent built-in search engines. System rules are inferred through review of
the systems and the records, since hardly any public records are available (e.g. users' manuals), and the office
of Administration of Courts denied respective Freedom of Information requests, or wrongfully refused to
respond on them (HRA C9e).
2.2 Case studies
Case studies are provided in Online Appendix I to demonstrate the impact of the IT systems on the
administration of justice in the Israel today.
2.3 Human rights, national and international legal implications
Legal analysis is largely restricted to technical and procedural matters, which needed to be addressed in the
course of implementing any IT system of the courts. Emphasis is given to records, pertaining to the initiation
(e.g. summonses) and termination (judgments) of litigation, which are recognized for centuries as critical for
integrity of the courts and the judicial process.
"Simulated Litigation", "Simulated Court Record" are used here pursuant to the Texas Penal Code 32.48 (see
Online Appendix I) conduct which involves the dissemination of invalid, ineffectual, unenforceable, and
typically abusive court records, and fraudulently inducing or extorting compliance with them.
3 IT system analysis
3.1 The systems
The current report primarily reviews the IT systems of the Israeli Supreme Court (name unknown) and the
district and magistrate courts (Net-Hamishpat). Net-Hamishpat, but not the systems of the Supreme Court,
provides the full range of case management, public access, and electronic filing capabilities.
3.2 Development and implementation - disregard of standards, dubious lawful authority
The State Ombudsman's Report 60b (2010) notes that the systems were developed and implemented in
disregard of the law and effectual standards, pertaining to the development of state IT systems (HRA C3b):
Contracts for system development were unlawfully awarded to corporations with no legal tender;
Contracts were signed with no specifications;
Development was conducted with no state employee core management;
Systems were accepted with no independent validation by state employees;
The servers of the courts were removed from the custody of the clerks of the courts to the custody of
a corporation, and
An unknown number of individuals were issued double ID cards.
The current generation of IT systems of the Israeli courts represents a sea-change in court procedures and
court administration. These changes in court procedures have not be legislated. Limited authorization is
provided in changes, which are promulgated in the Regulations of Civil Court Procedure and in the Regulations
of the Courts Office of the Clerk (2004), 5 Mechanical Systems (see Online Appendix I). In Article 5, the
Minister of Justice delegates to the Director of the Administration of Courts the authority to change the
Regulations of the Courts as necessary in conjunction with implementation of the new IT systems. Article 5
patently violates the principle of Separation of Powers. Moreover, the changes to the Regulations were never
published, in violation of the principle of Publicity of the Law, and the Administration of Courts refused to
respond on a Freedom of a Information request, asking for disclosure of such changes (HRA C9e).
Changes were discovered, nevertheless, through system analysis and data mining:
In all Israeli courts (including the Supreme Court) - the most significant change was abolishing the
responsibility and accountability of the chief clerk relative to integrity of court records, issuance of
summonses, authentication, service, and certification of judicial records.
In the Supreme Court - where the paper records are deemed authoritative, the validity of all
electronic records in the public access system was additionally voided by: a) adding to all records the
disclaimer subject to editing and phrasing changes, and b) omitting the standard statement by the
Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court, which had appeared on all records prior to 2002, True Copy of the
Original, with an electronic code (probably an early form of password secured file system) (Figure 1).
Both the Administration of Courts and current Presiding Justice of the Supreme Court Asher Grunis
refused to disclose, under whose authority and under what legal foundation such profound changes
were introduced in the electronic records of the Supreme Court in 2002.

Figure 1. Changes in the IT system of the Supreme Court ~ 2002. Left: Until early 2002, all electronic decisions
of the Supreme Court carried certification, True Copy of the Original, by the late Chief Clerk Shmaryahu
Cohen. Right: Since early 2002, the certification statement and any other reference to a chief clerk were
omitted. On the contrary, the disclaimer subject to editing and phrasing changes was added.

In the district, magistrate, and labor courts - where Net-Hamishpat is implemented, and where
electronic records are deemed authoritative, the validity of all electronic records was voided through
the implementation of invisible electronic signatures. For example, prior to the implementation of
Net-Hamishpat, judges were permitted to inscribe and sign unformatted decisions on the face of
motion records. With the implementation of Net-Hamishpat, such practice was established as Postit Decisions with no visible signatures at all (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Changes related to implementation ~ 2009 of Net-Hamishat IT system. Left: Under paper
administration - Rotem v Baram and State of Israel (73202/04) in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court - the February
26, 2006 Decision by Judge Shoshana Almagor is inscribed on the face of Plaintiff's Motion for Subpoena of
Witnesses. The Judge's stamp and hand signature appear next to the inscription, as well as the stamp by the
office of the clerk of the court Sent by fax or email on February 26, 2006. Right: In Net-Hamispat IT system Silman v Social Security (17520-08) in the Tel-Aviv District Court the August 30, 2012 Decision by Judge Hagai
Brenner is a Post-it Decision - a semi-transparent frame, superimposed on the face page of the Motion for
Disqualification for a Cause with no visible signature and no indication of its service.
3.3 Servers of unverified identity and dubious security
Review of the identity of the servers of the various courts, using standard browsers, failed to discover a single
server of certified identify (HRA C2b). Furthermore, the Administration of Courts refused to respond on a
Freedom of Information request: Who holds the ultimate administrative authority for the servers of the
Supreme Court of the State of Israel? (HRA C9e).
3.4 Invalid implementation of electronic signatures
Today, all decision records of the Israeli courts, with the notable exception of the Supreme Court, are
maintained as electronic records. Regardless, no visible electronic record can be found on any court records.
The notion of invisible signatures, defies the essence of a signature a symbol affixed with the intent to accept
responsibility (HRA C9d). Such invalid implementation of the Electronic Signature Act (2001) extends beyond
the courts (Figure 3). The implementation of invalid electronic signatures was related to the privatization of
the electronic signature system of the State of Israel to Comsign, a private corporation.

Figure 3. Implementation of invisible electronic signatures. Unsigned signature box of the 2006-7 Annual
Report by Attorney Yoram Hacohen, Magistrate of Databases, as published online by the Ministry of Justice.
The signature box says: Truly, Yoram Hacohen, Adv., Magistrate of Databases, Justice Technology and
Information Authority (Originally signed by a secure electronic signature) [the parenthetical part in red in the
original, jz]. The Ministry of Justice denied a Freedom of Information request for a visibly signed copy of the

Report, claiming that the electronic signature of a government officer is a private instrument.
3.5 Invalid implementation of summonses, authentication, certification, service instruments and procedures
In courts, originating in the English common law, the validity and integrity of the summonses are critical for
validity and integrity of the subsequent litigation as a whole. However, since implementation of the current IT
systems of the Israeli courts:
In the Supreme Court - petitions (matters of original jurisdiction) are heard as Preliminary
Proceedings with no issuance of the the Conditional Decree, which according to the respective
Regulations is the Summons in such procedure.
In the Supreme Court - while all valid court records are maintained in paper court files, the Notices to
Appear in Court (for hearings on petitions) are maintained as electronic records, which according to
the Supreme Court staff, are automatically eliminated from the IT system after the date of the hearing
(Zernik, 2014).
In the district and magistrate courts - summonses are issued by an unnamed person, unsigned, only
noted as issued by the Office of the Clerk (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Implementation of invalid summonses in Net-Hamishpat. Ben-Yaakov v Rolnick (5374702-12) in the

Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court. The summons is unsigned, bears no seal of the court, and is issued in the name of
Office of the Clerk of the Magistrate Court, Tel-Aviv.
Authentication of judicial records is quintessential in all courts, originating in the English common law,
including the Israeli courts, for rendering court decisions valid, effectual, and enforceable. Authentication of
judicial records is executed through due service of duly signed records on the parties to the matter before the
court with an accompanying letter, signed under the authority of the Chief Clerk.
However, since the implementation of the current IT systems of the Israeli courts:
In the Supreme Court - all decisions are mailed unsigned by the justices, bearing the disclaimer
subject to editing and phrasing changes and with no accompanying letter (authentication) by the
clerk of the court.
In the district, magistrate, and labor courts - all decisions are mailed with an unsigned accompanying
letter by an unnamed person (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Implementation of invalid authentication letters in Net-Hamishpat. Silman v Social Security (1752008) in the Tel-Aviv District Court the August 30, 2012 Accompanying letter of the decision (Figure 3) by Judge
Hagai Brenner says: Accompanying Letter. Attached is a decision record. Date: August 30, 2012. Signature of
a Clerk. The record is unsigned, fails to name its issuer, and bears no seal of the court (Brenner, 2012).
The certification of court records by the clerk of the court is likewise a routine procedure in all courts,
originating in the English common law. Duly certified court records are required for enforcement of court

orders and judgments. The Regulations of the Courts, Office of the Clerk (2004), 6a vests the Chief Clerk with
the authority to certify court records, True Copy of the Original.
Following the implementation of the current IT systems of the courts, no valid certification of court records
could be obtained from any of the courts, where it has been attempted. However, numerous examples of
forgeries were discovered:
In the Supreme Court - petitioners, who have asked for signed and certified copies of decisions in
their matters, routinely received simulated and/or forged records. Such records typically bear an
invalid certification statement, Duplication is True to the Original, instead of True Copy of the
Original, and are either signed by an unnamed person, using an illegible signature, or by a person,
who is not the duly appointed Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Simulation and/or forgery of certifications of Supreme Court decision record. a. June 1, 2008 Decision
in Macmull v Bank of Israel and State of Israel (3518/08). The petition originated in fraud by a bank on Debtor
Macmull in the Jerusalem Debtors' Court, and refusal of Bank of Israel to perform its duties as banking
regulator. The petition was summarily denied. The signatures of the justices are all in wet ink, in the form
(-), and in the same hand-writing as the signature of Sarah Lifschitz Chief Clerk. The certifying statement is
invalid - Duplication is True to the Original - instead of True Copy of the Original. Sarah Lifschitz was not
duly appointed Chief Clerk. The footnote says: Duplicate subject to editing and phrasing changes.

In the Tel-Aviv Labor Court - certification was issued by a person, falsely in possession of the Chief
Clerk stamp, while the person, who appears as Chief Clerk holds no appointment record as such
(Figure 7).

Figure 7. Simulation and/or forgery of certification of the Tel-Aviv Labour Court decision record. Left: The web
page of the Tel-Aviv Labour Court lists Chief Clerk: Ms Orly Hammer. Right: The 29, 2014 Judge Giltzer-Katz
Decision, imposing an unusual NIS 4,000 payment in attorneys fees on Plaintiff Genosar, the Israel Electric
Company whistle-blower, was certified using a True Copy of the Original stamp #49 of an unnamed male
Chief Clerk . Freedom of Information response shows that Ms Orly Hammer holds no lawful appointment as
Chief Clerk of the Tel-Aviv Labour Court, and that stamp #49 is unlawfully held by Ms Galit Maglid, a
secretary in the Tel-Aviv Labour Court.
3.6 Invalid implementation of authorities and permissions - discrimination in access to the courts
Attorneys, who are authorized as Net-Hamishpat users, are permitted access to electronic filing from remote
locations at all times. Such attorneys are permitted to enter records into court docket, bypassing the authority
of the clerk of the court. Unrepresented parties must file on paper in the office of the clerk during working
hours. Service on attorneys is by email, on unrepresented parties - by paper mail. Authorized attorneys are
permitted comprehensive access to Net-Hamishpat electronic records from remote locations at all time. In
most courts, access to electronic court records is also severely limited or prohibited on unrepresented parties
in their own court files, in disregard of the law.
3.7 Universal failure to docket summonses and authentication records
Review of court file records in Net-Hamishpat failed to discover the summonses in a number of cases, and it
remains unknown if they are maintained among the electronic records in Net-Hamishpat at all. Similarly, no
authentication records have been discovered upon inspection of the electronic records in Net-Hamishpat.

3.8 Adulterated, forged, and missing court records

Following the implementation of the new IT systems of the courts, numerous cases were reported, where
judges have adulterated or forged court records.
In the Supreme Court - data mining led to the discovery of numerous decision records, bearing forged
certification by the late Chief Clerk, up to 5 years after his death in 2002 (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Falsification and/or forgery of Supreme Court decision record. The signature and certification box of
Supreme Court Decision in Judith Franco Sidi et al v Authority pursuant to the Persons Disabled by Nazi
Persecutions Act (1582/02) in part says: Issued this date, February 14, 2007. Boaz Okon, Magistrate. This
duplicate is subject to editing and phrasing changes. Shmaryahu Cohen Chief Clerk. By February 2007, Boaz
Okon was no longer Registrar of the Supreme Court, and Shmaryahu Cohen was dead for about five years.
Numerous other records of the same nature were discovered.
The two cases of forgeries of court records, most widely reported by media, involved Judges Varda Alshech
and Hila Cohen (Zarchin, 2012, Yoaz, 2005). Neither was held accountable. In the numerous media reports,
relative to the falsification of judicial records by judges, the fundamental question has never been raised: How
was it technically possible? The most plausible explanation for such conditions in the Israeli courts is related to
undermining of the authority of the clerk of the court in the new IT systems of the courts.
3.9 Double books
By law, public access is permitted to all judicial decisions, unless lawfully sealed. In practice, Net-Hamishpat
permits judges to selectively permit public access to decision records (Figure 9).

a.
b.
Figure 9: Double-book system in Net-Hamishpat. September 23, 2014 List of Decisions in State of Israel v Rafi
Rotem (1074-02-13) in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court: a. A remote public access terminal shows no decisions,
and the screen says: "No details found". b. The office of the clerk terminal lists a dozen decisions.
3.10 Unlawful filing of evidence in criminal prosecutions with no prior inspection by the defendant
The Criminal Court Procedure Act prohibits the filing of evidence in criminal prosecution, unless the defendant
and his counsel were first provided the opportunity to inspect the evidence. Inspection of court files shows
that in Net-Hamishpat, the Prosecution electronically files the evidence without providing the defendant and
his counsel the opportunity to inspect the evidence first (Figure 10).

Figure 10: Unlawful filing of evidence in a criminal prosecution. List of Related Files in State of Israel v Rafi
Rotem (1074-02-13) in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court shows hyperlinks to seven (7) Israel Police investigation
files, although the Defendant had not been provided an opportunity to inspect the evidence, regardless of
repeat requests. The hyperlinks are inaccessible to the public and the Defendant.
3.11 Failure to register judgments
Honest registration of judgments is critical for honest administration of the courts. Typically, a Judgment
Book, or an Index of Judgments is considered one of the fundamental Books of Courts. Registration of
judgments in Net-Hamishpat is arbitrary and capricious (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Invalid registration of judgments. State of Israel v Roman Zadorov (502-07) in the Nazareth District
Court a case of dubious murder conviction. Under the Judgments tab in Net-Hamishpat, the September
14, 2010 Judgment, convicting Zadorov of murder and sentencing him to life in prison is not listed. The
February 24, 2014 Supplemental Judgment, which again convicted Zadorov of murder, is listed as Order on
Defendant's attorney to file certificate of counsel.
4. Case Studies
A series of case studies, further documenting the deficiencies in the new IT systems of the courts, outlined
above, is provided in Online Appendix I. The series of cases related to Tax Authority whistle-blower Rafi Rotem
is particularly instructive. Israeli media described him as being 'abused by the courts for over a decade' (Online
Appendix I):
a) In Rotem v Tax Authority et al in the Tel-Aviv Labour Court, Rotem tried to gain protection against
retaliation. The case, commenced in 2005, and was conducted as a paper court file. Inspection of the court file
revealed only an unsigned, unauthenticated judgment record, which the Court refused to certify.
b) Rotem v Baram in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court commenced in 2004 and was likewise conducted as a paper
court file. Inspection failed to discover summonses or authentication records, but uncovered numerous
unsigned judicial records, which were never duly served. Request for certification of the purported judgment
in the case, yielded a record, which should be deemed forgery/simulated court record.
c) The still ongoing State of Israel v Rotem in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court, which commenced in 2013,
provides a detailed example of the conduct of abusive, simulated criminal prosecution under Net-Hamishpat.
The hallmarks are:
Electronic records of vague and ambiguous validity, purportedly bearing invisible electronic
signatures;
A double-books system, where public access is purportedly permitted, but effectively denied to all
decision records issued so far so far (Figure 9);
Electronic filing of evidence by the prosecution without providing Defendant an opportunity to
inspect it first, as required by law (Figure 10);
Appearance of unauthorized outside attorneys as purported public defenders, who consistently
failed to perform their duties, and
Refusal of the clerk of the court to certify judicial decisions True Copy of the Original.

d) The petition Rotem v Samet in the Supreme Court, commenced and summarily denied in 2008, provides a
detailed example of the denial of access to a national tribunal for protection of rights, and the issuance of
simulated Supreme Court decision records, which the Supreme Court refused to have duly certified.
5. Hague Apostille Treaty (1961)
The Hague Apostille Treaty abolished the requirement for legalization of foreign public documents, and
established instruments for mutually recognized certification of court records. The State of Israel entered the
Treaty in 1978, but the evidence shows that the State of Israel employs a false procedure for apostille
certification by private notaries, in violation of both Israeli law and the Treaty. The Administration of Courts
refused to answer on a Freedom of Information request: Under whose authority and what legal foundation
such procedure was published? (HRA C10a).
6. Discussion
The fundamental deficiencies in the new IT systems of the Israeli courts, systems that hold high significance
relative to the administration of justice and were developed through a high cost, long-term project, overseen
by senior national judicial officers, cannot be reasonably deemed the result of oversight or human error.
The new systems consistently strip judicial records of any evidence of authenticity, validity, force and effect.
Therefore, the systems should be viewed as suspension of the law of the land, or denial of access to the civil
courts. As such, they represent a regime change, or a constitutional crisis in a nation with no constitution.
The evidence shows that invalid litigation records were issued also prior to implementation of the systems.
However, the older records reflect wrongdoing on a local basis, whereas the new IT systems reflect
wrongdoing on a national scale.
Valid IT systems could have provided unprecedented public access and unprecedented transparency of the
courts. In contrast, the systems which were implemented effectively created a double books system, which
undermines public access and transparency of the courts. Furthermore, in a key decision of the Israeli
Supreme Court (Association for Civil Rights v Minister of Justice, 5917/97), subject of which was public access
to court records under the new IT systems, then Presiding Justice Dorit Beinisch ruled that public access had to
be restricted, based on the 'constitutional' right for privacy.
Valid, visible electronic signatures could have practically eliminated the possibility of forgery, or the issuance of
simulated court records. In contrast, the implementation of invisible electronic signatures enhanced the ability
to generate forged or invalid, simulated court records. The privatization of certifying authorities of state
electronic signatures again defies their own purpose.
The conduct of the Israeli courts, inherent in the new IT systems, stands contrary to the fundamentals of the
English common law, in which the Israeli courts originate. Such conduct, likewise, stands contrary to the
fundamentals of fair hearing and access to national courts for protection of rights in Human Rights
international law. It also stands contrary to the fundamental of Jewish law, another major source of Israeli law,
where valid issuance and execution of summonses, execution of court records through valid signatures and
authentication/service procedures, particularly in matters of marriages and divorce, have been wellestablished for over 2000 years.
The development and implementation of the new IT system of the Israeli courts was launched under the
tenure of Supreme Court Presiding Justice Aharon Barak (in office 1995-2006). Under his tenure, the Supreme
Court purported to construe various fundamental human and civil rights and Barak advertised himself as
leading of a 'Constitutional Revolution' in Israel (Zernik, 2012). Outside observers perceived Barak as an
'enlightened despot' at best, or the world's record holder in 'judicial hubris' (Posner, 2007). The current report
proposes that Justice Barak in fact presided over unprecedented corruption of the Israeli courts.
The implementation of the new IT systems in the Israeli courts correlated with a period, which has been
marked by unprecedented, rampant government corruption and the emergence of extreme socio-economic
gaps. The economy fell under the dominated of a handful of 'tycoons', and Israel has been propelled to the
first place among OECD nations in poverty rate without suffering any economic crisis. The socio-economic
transformation has also led to the emergence in recent years of a social protest of unprecedented scale.
The State of Israel is not alone. Similar, but older IT systems have been reported in the state and federal courts
in the United States (HRA, 2015). In this context, the key role of two US-based international corporations, IBM
and EDS, in the unlawful development and implementation of the new IT systems of the Israeli courts should
be noted, as well as the conduct of IBM in other nations (Zernik, 2014).
Undermining of the integrity of the Israeli justice system by senior justice officers has serious national and
international implications. For example, the competence of the Israeli justice system is likely to be questioned
in any attempt to bring disputes between Palestine and Israel before the International Criminal Court.

7. Proposed Corrective Measures

The implementation of the new, fraudulent IT systems in the Israeli courts, implicate s the judiciary as a class,
as well as the Israeli Bar Association and the Ministry of Justice. Corrective measures may eventually require a
Truth and Reconciliation Commission or similar approach.
Under similar circumstances in the US courts a century ago, key corrective measures involved reform of the
offices of the clerks (Messinger, 2002). Similar measures may be needed in Israel.
Corrective measures should note the unique relationship between code and law (Lessig, 2000), demonstrated
in IT systems of the courts, therefore requiring transparency pursuant to Publicity of the Law, and
accountability to the legislature pursuant to the Separation of Powers placing the development and
implementation of such systems under accountability to the legislature.
Human rights and internet activists should keep vigilance in monitoring such systems.
IT experts should assume more prominent duties in the safeguard of civil society in our era.
8. Online Appendices
I. Zernik, J. (2015) "Fraudulent New IT Systems of the Israeli Courts - Unannounced Regime Change?"
https://www.scribd.com/doc/252258857/
II. Human Rights Alert, NGO, (2013) Appendix to Submission for the UPR of Human Rights in the State of Israel
by the UN Human Rights Council
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8Aa2xQGbmk5cjNxd2szX05oMkU/edit?usp=sharing
Acknowledgement
Thanks to Dror Zernik, PhD, for help in data production.
References
Lessig, L. (2000) The Code in Law, and the Law in Code, [online] Harvard Law School
Messinger, S. (2002) Order in The Court - History of Clerks of United States Courts, [online] Federal Judicial
Center
Posner, R. (2007) Enlightened Despot, [online] New Republic
State Ombudsman's Report 60b (2010) Development of IT systems of the Israeli Ministry of Justice and the
Israeli courts [online] State of Israel Ombudsman's Office
Yoaz, Y. (2005) Panel rules to fire Judge Hila Cohen, [online] Haaretz
Zarchin, T. (2012) Israel Bar Association head says Tel-Aviv district court judge must go, [online] Haaretz
Zernik, J. (2012) 'Constitutional Revolution' in the State of Israel? compilation of media reports [online]
Human Rights Alert (NGO)
Zernik, J. (2014) Corruption of governments and IBM compilation of media reports, [online] Human Rights
Alert (NGO)
Zernik, J. (2015) IT systems of the US federal courts, justice, and governance, [online] ICEG