Defense attorney for officers with an unusual warning: "Ben Gvir is trying to become a super-commissioner"

In a special interview for the "Maariv" podcast, attorney Ofer Bartal reveals everything: from the behind-the-scenes dramas in the Shula Zaken case and the recordings that shocked the country, to the sharp criticism of the attempt to make the police subordinate to the political echelon, and the surprising explanation of why, in his view, "Kohelet" member Aviad Bakshi is suitable to serve on the Supreme Court. Bartal also talks about representing a father who shot his adopted son to death, the flare case in Caesarea, and the trash can arson case. A conversation with one of Israel's senior defense attorneys — what he thinks about the future of democracy here and how to improve the judicial system.

Bartal is representing in one of the recent media-covered cases that deals with an extraordinary tragedy: Shay Blum, a father who shot his adopted son, 23-year-old Omri Blum (of blessed memory), in a grove. Recently, the father reached a plea bargain and he will serve 10 years in prison. "He stabbed him after he had already passed away. And after it was clear that he had passed away, he said it in the first call to the 100 hotline, it is recorded: 'I stabbed him after his death'. Omri (of blessed memory) took the knife that the father bought for another son, took it out of the place where it was, and wanted to stab Shay with this knife," says Bartal and notes that they will soon file a pardon request in the case.

How did this case actually end in a plea bargain of ten years in prison? "This case ended first of all with a different offense, with the offense of causing death in a state of diminished responsibility, because there is a very close proximity to self-defense... The father was threatened, he thought they were about to kill him, Omri approached him, even after he pulled out the gun, he continued to approach him in order to stab him and only then did he shoot, except that he fired too many shots. 'Disproportionate,' said the judge."

He further added that "the parents adopted Omri, who was 14 months old, the baby was born addicted to hard drugs but they did not know that when a woman drinks a lot of alcohol during pregnancy, often a child is born with fetal alcohol syndrome, this is a terrible and awful syndrome... At age six, after he had already headbutted his kindergarten teacher and broke her teeth, he tried to burn his house down several times. It was a very, very difficult childhood, nevertheless they took care of him all the time, they had another child, they were a family of four children but their lives were terrible. The weeks before the incident were very stormy. Omri ran away twice from the institution where he was, he threatened the father that he would settle the score with him, the father took it very seriously, a week before the incident he filed a complaint against him with the police."

Your firm represents, together with your partner Dov Gilad Cohen, police officers whose promotion the Minister of National Security tried to prevent, such as, for example, Ruti Haslich (an esteemed officer in the investigations division whose promotion Ben Gvir tried to prevent). When you have such a client, do they understand the significance of someone going head-to-head against the minister?

"Look, you have to understand, police officers are very afraid of the minister, they know that he is part of their promotion, and promotion is the thing that is most important to a police officer. They do it only out of lack of choice. It must be explained in this matter, that it is written in the law, that the minister has the authority to sign every appointment in the Israel Police, from the rank of Deputy Commander and up. Until today, all ministers were a 'rubber stamp', the police would decide on the promotion of a police officer up to the rank of Commander. And that was what it was, that was how it was agreed, so that politicians would not really influence and take over the police. There are hundreds of Deputy Commanders in the Israel Police. Whoever controls the Deputy Commanders, controls the Israel Police. And this is actually a direct attempt by the minister to take over the Israel Police. He wants to be a kind of super-commissioner."

According to him, "a police officer has nothing but his promotion. In the case of Haslich for example, he thinks she said something in one of the Knesset committees that does not match his policy. But she said the things after her commanders told her what to say. She represented the Israel Police in these statements, and not herself. The investigations division is supposed to be completely independent. Imagine that a politician takes over the investigations in the police, the decision against whom to investigate and what to investigate him for and how to use all the many powers of the police — this is the heart of the matter."

"The firing of flares towards the Prime Minister's house courtyard? They intended for people to say 'Oh, there is a flare'"

Let's move on to the case of the firing of flares towards the courtyard of the Prime Minister's house in Caesarea by protesters against Netanyahu. Where does the case stand today? "We are conducting proofs. We denied the indictment there — terrorism, attempted arson, and reckless use of fire are attributed. We think that the charge of terrorism and attempted arson are completely legally baseless. Three district judges have already expressed their opinion regarding the baselessness of the terrorism charges."

And yet, how did we get there? "They wanted to show, supposedly, that the protests had not yet lost their momentum, so they fired. They intended for people to say 'Oh, there is a flare', but they did not intend of course... The prosecution rightly put them on trial, there was an investigation as it should be, okay. But no one here intended terrorism. In the case of the trash cans of the 'circle of fire', they did not put them on trial for terrorism, and there they really lit trash cans (Bartal also represents there). It is legally baseless. They sat for 44 days, I don't think they deserve more than that."

"I don't advise people to be state witnesses"

Let's talk about Shula Zaken. Let's recall Bartal and his partner represented Zaken, who was very close to former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. She was accused with him in the Holyland affair, but a moment before the verdict she signed a state witness agreement, saved herself from a heavy sentence, and incriminated Olmert by providing recordings of the two. Maybe there is a listener here whose name is Yonatan Urich. What advice would you give him when he remembers the story of Shula Zaken and Ehud Olmert? "She knew Olmert from the age of 16. Listen, I must tell you, Shula was ultimately a state witness. I don't advise people to be state witnesses. It is very difficult, even if they exempt you from prison entirely as a result of you reaching a state witness agreement. It is difficult because they always see you as a snitch, the tattletale, even though you are helping the court to do justice."

According to him, "in white-collar crimes, sometimes it is better not to be a state witness, even if you will receive a sentence and you will go to prison. Sometimes it is better because when you are released, you will not be an outcast in the society in which you have been moving all your life. Ten days before Shula Zaken's verdict, we were exposed to the recordings for the first time and we could not believe our ears. In very, very important cases, everything can happen. Everything is everything."

"We are no longer fighting for principles"

Bartal, a former helicopter pilot, still does reserve duty. He explains that he is a fierce opponent of the judicial coup that Yariv Levin tried to carry out, and that he personally opposed at the time the cessation of volunteering for reserves despite the danger he saw in the reform. He says that he and Dr. Aviad Bakshi, from the "Kohelet Forum", one of the candidates that Yariv Levin tried to promote to the Supreme Court in every way, served together.

Is he suitable to be a Supreme Court judge in your opinion? "I personally think so, and I think it's a pity that a compromise was not reached between the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Court. This war has become personal. We are no longer fighting for principles. It has become a war for leadership on both sides. And both sides sometimes do not stop to think about their principles, but they are fighting."

Can someone who supported the judicial coup be a Supreme Court judge? Won't it undermine democracy? "Listen, part of the people support the judicial coup. I have no problem with some of the Supreme Court judges thinking so. I am telling you that some of the Supreme Court judges who sit today in the Supreme Court are ready to sign off on some of the details of the judicial coup. One of the central things in the judicial coup is actually to cause the Knesset to be above everyone. The Knesset in the State of Israel is controlled by the government. If they had caused the Knesset to actually be superior to the court, then the court, in fact, would not be a brake. And that would have dragged us into not being a democracy. We need the Basic Law: Legislation like air to breathe in the State of Israel, which will clarify what the authority of each branch is."

Why don't trials in Israel move? "I had a case of fourteen years! The person was suspended from his position at the age of fifty-three, and three months before his retirement the Supreme Court acquitted him of all charges. It's crazy. The investigations are endless. I represent the mayor of a large city whose investigations have been going on for seven years and we still don't have an invitation to a hearing or a case closure. Everyone has responsibility. We, the defense attorneys, are very responsible for this matter, there is responsibility for the judges and for the prosecution as well. The meetings in the prosecution are endless about everything. It is possible to be much faster at the decision-making junctions."