"Why should I be afraid?": The correspondence of the "gatekeepers" in the Bar Association is exposed

The Chairman of the Bar Association, Amit Bechar, declares himself a protector of the gatekeepers. Internal correspondence of the gatekeepers in the Association, exposed here for the first time and collected by the State Comptroller, gives this an additional angle.

Attorney Mirit Shalev has been serving as the legal advisor to the Bar Association for four years. The State Comptroller collected messages she sent to a factor in the Association, with whom she shared her feeling regarding the term of Chairman Bechar: "I encountered in this term so many dilemmas that did not exist in three terms with Efi Naveh, Avi Khimi, and Lior Shapira."

Shalev is a partner in the law firm "Cassuto," which won the position in a tender. "How many conversations I had with Cassuto about this. It is also clear to me that we will not continue after this year," she wrote to the factor, and added: "Many things were approved at his (Bechar's - N.B.) request: transferring the international department to publishing, an advisor for ultra-Orthodox affairs, a advertising advisor 'Gitam', a community relations advisor, a social media manager. See how many things and at an astronomical cost. The moves are legal, but there is no doubt that they harm the management of the Association, harm the budget, and harm efficiency."

Shalev did not detail what those many "dilemmas" were. In her response to the article, she claimed that she meant the judicial revolution and the Bar Association Law, but her correspondence with the factor in the Association dealt with dealing with Bechar himself, and the government's actions were not mentioned at all. Shalev stated in response to the publication: "What is attributed to me is completely wrong and includes distortions and incorrect contexts. It is regrettable that there are those who provide internal correspondence to smear the Association. I never expressed that I am considering leaving my position. In personal correspondence, I noted that it is a more complex term compared to previous terms, and this is of course with attention to the political situation in the country, the government's legislative initiatives, and the specific legislation with which the Association dealt. It is a completely understandable statement and a factual and objective matter."

One event that outraged Shalev occurred when Chairman Bechar allegedly appointed heads of committees in the Association without authority, because the law instructs the council to appoint or authorize the chairman for this. Shalev ordered to ratify the appointments in the council plenum. In the correspondence collected by the Comptroller, Bechar's assistant, Attorney Vered Zeitman, who was recently appointed CEO of the Association, accused Shalev of being responsible for this. "Why was a proper check not carried out?" Zeitman wrote to Shalev. "It is your duty to comment. This is your duty as a legal advisor and that is why you come to meetings."

Shalev responded to Zeitman that "it is not clear how it was understood that there is no need at all for the council's approval," and that "it is not my job to actively check if appointments are made with authority, especially when things are not brought to my attention." She added: "I reject the claim against me and the attempt to justify the conduct in retrospect through me." Shalev stated in response that "I did not determine that the decision to appoint committee heads is 'illegal'. The matter was raised to the National Council and it authorized the chairman to appoint chairmen. The claims in the article were raised by the previous CEO of the Association and she retracted them as part of an agreement." We note that the Bar Association paid the CEO hundreds of thousands of shekels of public money so that she would waive her claims against the Association's chairman.

---

"I don't need to be afraid to say my opinion"

The Comptroller also collected correspondence of the accountant Tomer Yazdi, who serves as the Association's comptroller and VP of Finance, in which he wrote to a factor in the Association: "I received a really unpleasant and unacceptable call from Amit (Bechar). I don't need to be afraid to say my opinion anywhere even if it doesn't sound good to someone. My questions and requests also protect and defend him."

Yazdi even announced that he would not continue in his position without a "protection agreement," according to which if he is fired or resigns, he will receive several salaries. In another message, Yazdi wrote that "I explained under what conditions I would be willing to stay in the problematic and very political term for me. It is really not easy and the success of the Association is important to me. If there is an appendix (protection - N.B.) to the agreement, I will stay, and if not, I will go my way. The place is sick, some of the demands, to put it mildly, are delusional. Sometimes you have to stand on your hind legs, and I can only do that with an agreement in the personal file. For the benefit of the Association and its members."

Yazdi did not finally receive a protection agreement, and wrote to his interlocutor: "I refuse to vote in any vote that will be in the tender committee until I have a protection agreement." In his response to the article, Yazdi claimed that he demanded the protection agreement because of the government's attacks and the Bar Association Law, but in the correspondence he justified the demand: "You have to stand on your hind legs, and I can only do that with an agreement."

Yazdi stated regarding the correspondence: "The claims arising in the article are full of distortions, inventions, and incorrect links. I did not think and did not say that the conduct of the Association's chairman is problematic and I did not receive problematic demands from Bechar and the Association's CEO in terms of legality." Regarding his demand for a protection agreement, Yazdi stated: "Regarding the terms of my employment, the Association is under political attack from government factors, already in the Knesset discussions on the law to weaken the Association I declared that when the law passes I will be forced to resign, together with work on building an impossible budget, and in combination with the conflict between the chairman and the CEO I felt it was my time to resign. When I was asked to stay, I asked for an improvement in the conditions of future retirement. Until today I have not received anything and yet I decided to stay. The focus on the protection matter is a distortion."

One decision that outraged Yazdi was recorded when Bechar decided that the Association, a state body, would launch a campaign against the government, with the publication of advertisements in all newspapers with the participation of law firms, in a huge amount of 300 thousand shekels. However, Bechar did not take care to collect the funding for the advertisements from the firms. According to him, the participation of the firms in the funding is voluntary only. After the payment demand arrived, Zeitman demanded that Yazdi collect the money himself, 5,000 shekels from each firm. Yazdi wrote to her: "Attached are the payment demands to the large firms according to the list you transferred to me, note that they amount to only 85 thousand shekels." That is, only 85 thousand out of 300 thousand. Zeitman replied: "This is part of the amount, there are small firms that need to be spoken to individually."

The previous CEO of the Bar Association sent Zeitman an email in which she wrote: "If there is a gap between the firms - let's think how to prepare." Zeitman scolded Yazdi: "The only gap that exists right now is effective bookkeeping management and that everyone knows their role." The firms finally participated in only 85 thousand of the payment, while the remaining 215 thousand were financed from public funds.

Yazdi stated in response to this that "the task of collecting the money from the law firms was problematic technically, and also in terms of my ability to perform it, but not in terms of legality. The Association checked with me how much money remained in the relevant budget item and the balance was higher than the total cost of the advertisements."

Regarding the advertisements, the Bar Association stated in response: "The advertisements published in 2025 were part of a strategic and important move to stop the attempt to dismiss the legal advisor and the personal incitement against her. The VP of Finance Yazdi did not object at any stage to the execution of the campaign. The participation of the firms was not a condition for its execution, because the budget for it was approved and available in a relevant item in the Association's budget, and the text of the campaign was approved by the National Council of the Association. The participation in financing the advertisements was achieved thanks to the work of Attorney Zeitman to involve the leading firms in Israel."

The Bar Association's response: "This is correspondence originating from the former CEO of the Association, who filed a false and fabricated complaint to the State Comptroller to prevent the termination of her employment at the Bar Association against the background of dissatisfaction with her performance, to put it mildly. The responses of the legal advisor and the VP of Finance, which refute the allegedly claimed lies, speak for themselves. Even after improper pressure from Yariv Levin, the false complaint ended in the immediate termination of her employment, when she retracted all her claims, with the support of the State Comptroller. The poison machine and the government that surrounded, activated, and used her, continue even now in the effort to smear and harm the Association because of the determined stand against the attempt to eliminate the legal system and the rule of law in Israel. We will not be deterred by this and will continue until the independence of the rule of law and democracy is ensured."