It is hard to believe that even the wildest imagination, whose roots reach deep into the soil of the Middle East, could come up with stories like those at the heart of cases 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 and 4,000, a series of police investigations involving alleged corruption on the part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his associates.
As these accusations loomed in the background, reports on Tuesday said that Nir Hefetz, a former Netanyahu spokesman considered one of his closest confidants, offered retired Judge Hila Gerstel a quid pro quo whereby Netanyahu would appoint her attorney general in exchange for her closing a case in which his wife, Sara, was alleged to have abused public funds.
Gerstel refused the offer but did not go to the police with this at the time.
It seems that reality – if these stories are indeed true – is stranger than fiction. This is not another mere casting of bread onto the waters, but rather dumping whole trucks of it. If there is even an iota of truth to these reports, it would rattle the very foundation of all bodies of government. If there is something to these reports, then corruption has threatened the judicial holy of holies, the Supreme Court.
If, however, such an offer was made in earnest and not as a joke, Gerstel should have notified the police immediately and without hesitation, just as Chief Justice Esther Hayut, in whom she confided, should have done. The fact that both refrained from doing so, together with the fact that both had remained silent for so long, raises serious questions over the validity of the story.
A similar peculiarity arises in light of the fact that even if he wanted to, Netanyahu would have been unable to guarantee Gerstel's nomination, as the lessons of the Bar-On Hebron scandal – an incident involving accusations made in 1997, during Netanyahu's first term in office, claiming that former Attorney General Ronnie Bar-On was appointed as part of a deal between Netanyahu and Shas leader Aryeh Deri – ensured that an attorney general can no longer be casually appointed in backroom deals. Gerstel is an experienced and reputable jurist so it is safe to assume she knew this as well.
It is entirely likely that this new story will turn out to be a fabrication – and not a particularly complex one; a ploy used by the police to exert pressure on potential witnesses in other cases and give them an incentive to become state witnesses.
Former Communications Ministry Director General Shlomo Filber has joined the disreputable club of state witnesses, whose members include many criminals. Most, if not all, are involved in serious crimes and are trying to extricate themselves from punishment by making up information the police believe is the "smoking gun." Only when all the facts become clear and we know the price the police were willing to pay for the information they received, will we know if the move was both wise and moral.
Regardless, the need to do some soul-searching is getting stronger, specifically regarding the devious interrogation methods whose stench – just like the leaks – rises from police offices and wafts long distances.
Let the end result be as it may, it seems that all will agree that even the ancient understanding that investigations involve trickery must have ethical and legal boundaries.
Only time – and hard evidence – will tell if this is nothing but hot air or if a cluster bomb has exploded and its shrapnel has dragged the Israeli law enforcement, executive and judiciary down into a bizarre and endless saga.
