To prevent the takeover, the organizations petitioned the Jerusalem District Court for temporary ex parte restraining orders, which were granted.

According to the organizations, the case began in 2020, when Mordecai Veberman began an unexpected approach to the Anglican Church and was even officially baptized into Christianity. During these years, Veberman found employment at CMJ (Church's Ministry among Jewish People) – a British organization founded in 1809 that has operated in Jerusalem for nearly 200 years. This is the parent organization to which the Vincent Association and the Israeli Trust of the Anglican Church belong, which operate the church's school and hold the historic properties.

According to the organizations, as time passed, Veberman grew closer to Vincent's CEO, Father Darryl, who recently left his position. Veberman managed to infiltrate the community ranks, expressed interest in joining the pastoral track in the church, worked in the organizations and established personal relationships with key figures in CMJ in Israel and abroad. The trust that CMJ representatives placed in Veberman "The trust that CMJ representatives placed in him was so complete that, because most organization representatives do not speak Hebrew, they signed Hebrew documents at his request without receiving translations, relying entirely on his explanations of their content."

According to the organizations, last month they accidentally discovered a shocking detail – companies that according to the court petition are owned by Veberman and his business partners, hold agreements that are purported to be sales agreements for two real estate properties – the Anglican school at 82 Hanevi'im Street and the old "Voice of Israel" building at 25 Petruschka Street.

The school, purchased by the church in the 1840s, is a complex spanning 15,058 square meters (162,089 square feet). The school educates approximately 230 students annually from kindergarten through high school, many of them children of diplomats staying in Israel. According to the organizations, this is a property whose value is "priceless." The "Voice of Israel" building at 25 Petruschka Street was purchased by the organization in the early 20th century.

In any case, according to the documents accidentally discovered by organization personnel, the Petruschka Street building was allegedly sold for 7.5 million shekels (about $2.2 million), and the Anglican school for 60 million shekels (about $17.9 million).

According to the documents, at the signing ceremony, the companies owned by Veberman and his business partners were supposed to pay Vincent Association 9 million shekels (about $2.7 million) for the school and 1 million shekels (about $300,000) for the Petruschka Street building. However, according to the organizations, no sales transactions were discussed.

The sale of the Anglican school and the Petruschka building was not on the agenda, and in any case the transactions were not properly approved by the organization institutions and CMJ. Moreover, the signatures were allegedly accompanied by a forged seal (according to the organization, it has had no seal for the past five years), and the two people who appear as alleged signatories cannot read Hebrew and never intended to sign sale agreements. According to the court petition, the signatures on the sale agreements on behalf of the organization in Hebrew were obtained by deceiving office holders who do not speak Hebrew.

As part of the petition, the organizations claim that Mordechai Veberman and his attorney, Kobi Ifrach, used forged documents and false powers of attorney designed to create an impression of a sale approval process in the organization's institutions.

According to the organizations, the only transaction discussed with Veberman and his partners that was actually approved was a combination deal in the Petruschka building, and that it was agreed that Vincent Association would remain the landowner. According to them, the subject of selling the school was not discussed at all. The organizations are represented by attorneys Odelia Ofer and Goni Blumfeld from the Herzog Fox Neeman law firm.

The petition further claims that Veberman "played a double game" – on one hand he acted as someone who belonged to the community of believers and claimed he was interested in donating money to the organizations and helping them, and on the other hand allegedly planned to defraud and deceive them and take over their properties. The organizations said that discovering the transactions clarified that this was a "Trojan horse," and that they intend to file a police complaint.

Attorney Kobi Ifrach stated, "First, I have no personal acquaintance with Mordechai Veberman. I met him two years ago in another transaction where I represented the other side. Second, I have never forged documents and/or powers of attorney. Third, some of the signatories are Hebrew speakers and are indeed proficient in reading and writing. Fourth, I have never presented any false document. I am sorry that a large and respected law firm accuses a colleague of serious matters with unrestrained attacks before checking the facts. I am confident that the court will decide that no fault was found in my work as the church's attorney."

No response was received from Veberman by the deadline for closing this edition and publishing the story. His response to the court has also not yet been filed.

Ironically, just days ago the British Christian newspaper Evangelicals Now published a celebratory article about Veberman from CMJ's annual conference. In the article, he was presented as a success story – a former military rabbi who converted to Christianity and told a gathering of 400 people how he "came home" to Messianic Judaism. "I stand before you not as someone who left Judaism, but as someone who found its fulfillment," Veberman was quoted as saying. Days after that, the organizations discovered the affair.

The post Former Hassid accused of fraud targeting Anglican properties appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The US Justice Department and several states have asked a federal court to compel Google to sell Chrome, its widely-used web browser, in a move that could reshape the $2 trillion company's future and transform internet competition, according to reporting from The New York Times. The request, submitted Wednesday, follows Judge Amit P. Mehta's August ruling in the US District Court for the District of Columbia that found Google had illegally maintained a search monopoly.

The government's proposal, marking the most significant tech antitrust remedy since the 2000 Microsoft case, also gives Google an ultimatum: either sell Android, its smartphone operating system or eliminate mandatory Google services on Android devices. Chrome commands roughly 67% of the global browser market, while Android dominates mobile software with a 71% market share, according to Statcounter. "The playing field is not level because of Google's conduct, and Google's quality reflects the ill-gotten gains of an advantage illegally acquired," government officials stated in their filing.

Kent Walker, Google's president of global affairs, strongly contested the government's stance. "DOJ's wildly overbroad proposal goes miles beyond the court's decision," he wrote in a blog post, arguing it would disrupt Google products that consumers find valuable. The company is expected to submit its own remedial proposals by Dec. 20, with Judge Mehta scheduled to hear arguments this spring and issue a ruling by summer's end.

The case stems from Google's practice of paying companies like Apple, Mozilla, and Samsung to be the default search engine on their devices, with payments reaching $26.3 billion in 2021, according to trial evidence. While Google maintains users choose its service for superior performance, the Justice Department argued these agreements cemented the company's market dominance by ensuring robust search traffic and data collection.

The government's filing also seeks to restrict Google's artificial intelligence ventures, requesting forced divestiture of stakes in AI companies that could compete in search, including its investment in Anthropic, maker of the Claude chatbot. Additionally, the proposal would require Google to allow publishers to opt out of having their content used for AI model training, setting up another significant battleground in the ongoing tech regulation debate.

The post End of Google's monopoly? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Mexico is weighing the use of masked judges to preside over organized crime trials, a measure aimed at shielding members of the judiciary from potential retribution by drug cartels. This proposal, added this week to a contentious package of judicial reforms, comes in response to a surge in murders of police chiefs, prosecutors, and judges as cartel power has expanded since 2018.

Mexico's courts could use masked judges for cartel trialshttps://t.co/Qvt3nlSmVH

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) August 28, 2024

According to The Telegraph, the amendment to the planned overhaul of the court system calls for "judges without faces," leaving the implementation details to senior judges. This consideration follows several high-profile attacks on judicial figures, including the murder of Judge Roberto Elías Martínez in the central state of Zacatecas in December 2022. Prosecutors allege that Martínez's assassination was ordered from within a prison where two defendants in cases he was overseeing were being held. In Zacatecas, 103 judges have reportedly received threats.

The proposal draws parallels to measures employed in Peru during the 1990s to try alleged members of the Shining Path terrorist group. However, the Peruvian system, which involved masked judges or those seated behind screens, proved highly controversial and led to numerous miscarriages of justice.

The United Nations has cautioned that the use of anonymous judges could potentially violate suspects' rights to due process. Despite these concerns, the judicial reform package, which also includes provisions for the election of judges, appears to have sufficient support in the Mexican Congress to pass.

Critics have labeled the reforms as populist and authoritarian, arguing they could undermine judicial independence and allow political control over the courts. The proposed changes have sparked economic concerns, with the Mexican peso's value declining as investors worry about the rule of law in the country.

US Ambassador Ken Salazar has taken the unusual step of publicly criticizing the reforms, describing them as a "threat to democracy." This statement prompted a sharp response from outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who announced on Tuesday that he was putting relations with the United States and Canada "on pause" after both countries questioned the legal reforms.

The post Mexico proposes masked judges for cartel trials to avoid retaliation appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Haifa Family Court has recently dismissed a lawsuit filed by a woman seeking custody of the dog she once shared with her ex-husband. The plaintiff asserted that her bond with the dog was profound and that she had invested the majority of time and resources in its care. However, Judge Efraim Tschisik ruled in favor of the ex-husband, citing concerns that shuttling the dog between homes could be detrimental to its welfare.

The dispute ignited in the wake of the couple's separation when the woman sought to maintain a relationship with their shared pet. Following a heated exchange of text messages – where legal threats were met with counter-threats of harassment complaints – the matter escalated to the courtroom. Initially, the court issued a temporary arrangement, allowing the dog to stay with the woman from Monday to Thursday and with the defendant from Thursday to Monday.

In her plea, the plaintiff painted a picture of devoted care, claiming responsibility for the dog's primary needs, including food and even the installation of a tracking chip. She argued that her ex-husband's refusal to share custody was driven purely by vindictiveness, noting his lack of prior pet-owning experience. The defendant countered these claims, asserting his status as the dog's registered owner and primary financial provider for its care, including medical treatments and vaccinations. He further emphasized that the veterinarian recognized him as the dog's de facto owner.

After considering the evidence, Judge Tschisik sided with the ex-husband. While acknowledging that some aspects of the dog's care had been shared, the judge determined that the defendant was indeed the primary owner. The ruling stressed the importance of a clean break between the former spouses to prevent further deterioration of their relationship. In the judge's view, the best interests of both the dog and the parties aligned in this instance, justifying sole custody with the ex-husband.

"Throughout the dog's residency, the responsibility for care, vaccination, and interaction with authorities fell primarily on the defendant," Judge Tschisik wrote in his decision. "The fact that some grooming and caretaking duties were shared does not warrant denying the defendant's status as the more dominant owner, a fact corroborated by the veterinarian's testimony." The judge further opined that constantly moving the dog between households would not serve its best interests, concluding that establishing a single, stable home for the pet was paramount.

The post Gone to the dogs: Couple's divorce unleashes battle over pet appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Knesset Tuesday passed the first reading of major bills pertaining to the judicial reform, including the highly contested override clause.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

After a lengthy filibuster, the plenum split between Coalition-Opposition lines, with 61 voting in favor of the measure, and 52 voting against it.

If passed, the override clause will allow a 61-seat majority of the Knesset to relegislate laws struck down by the Supreme Court as "unconstitutional," in effect for as long as the coalition remains in power. After a year, the possibility to extend comes under review.

The proposed law would also limit the Supreme Court's judicial review, requiring 80% of its justices to overturn a law and prevent the attorney general from declaring Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu unfit for office.

Tuesday's vote marks the first of three before the bill becomes law. At this stage, it heads to the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee for revisions ahead of the final votes, which usually come in short succession.

The legislation is part of reforms proposed by Justice Minister Yariv Levin that have sparked massive protests in Israel, with an estimated 300,000 people participating in demonstrations last Saturday.

Opponents claim the bill would grant the new government unbridled power, while supporters say it will balance the power of the judiciary, executive and legislative branches, bringing Israel more in line with other democratic nations.

Netanyahu, who has been barred by the attorney general from discussing the specifics of the reform program due to a possible conflict of interest with his ongoing criminal trial, has called on the opposition to present its own proposal for judicial overhaul.

"For eight weeks we have been calling for negotiations. We are bringing the reform to the Knesset to decide," he said last week. "I call upon those in the opposition to do something simple: Present your alternative in an attempt to reach an agreement."

The premier said that with goodwill an agreement could be reached "within days."

Opposition leaders Yair Lapid and Benny Gantz rejected the overture and conditioned any negotiations on the government freezing the accompanying legislative process.

Other bills that passed first reading on Tuesday include one that would repeal the clauses of the Disengagement Law, allowing Israelis to enter territory from which Israel disengaged in 2005, and thereby allowing the government to legalize settlements in the region, such as Homesh.

i24NEWS and JNS.org contributed to this report.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Knesset advances first batch of judicial reform bills appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Israeli lawmakers engaged in a shouting match on Monday in a parliamentary committee deciding on government plans to overhaul the judiciary, a move President Isaac Herzog has warned risks tipping the country into "constitutional collapse."

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

The plans, which would give rightist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu greater control of appointments to the bench and weaken the Supreme Court's ability to strike down legislation or rule against the executive, have triggered widespread protests.

Video: Amir Ettinger

The Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee voted to send the first chapter of the plan to the plenum for a first reading, after a rowdy start to the meeting in which at least three Opposition lawmakers were thrown out forcibly, to shouts of "shame, shame".

"You will burn up the country!" Idan Roll of the centrist Yesh Atid party told Simcha Rothman, the panel chairman from the hard-right Religious Zionism Party before being ushered out.

Netanyahu, currently on trial on corruption charges which he denies, says the changes are needed to curb activist judges who have overreached their powers to interfere in the political sphere.

Critics say they risk destroying Israel's system of democratic checks and balances by weakening the courts, handing unbridled power to the executive, and endangering human rights and civil liberties.

Tens of thousands have demonstrated against the plans in weekly protests in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities and a major demonstration is expected later on Monday to coincide with the move to vote on the bill in the full parliament. Many companies let their workers join the protests without penalty, including many in the high-tech sector, some of which have warned that the reforms could severely undermine Israel's standing in the financial community. In recent weeks some Israeli companies have announced that they would be pulling out their funds from Israel, with global credit rating agencies warning that the changes in Israel's legal structure could increase the chances of a downgrade.

Morning trains from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem were packed with people, many carrying Israeli flags and protest signs, heading to the demonstration.

As well as the parliamentary Opposition to Netanyahu's right-wing government, warnings have come from Israel's banks and tech sector that the changes risked undermining the civil institutions that underpin Israel's economic prosperity.

On Sunday evening, in a rare intervention, head of state Herzog made a televised plea for consensus, saying that the bitterness had left Israel on the brink of "constitutional and social collapse".

US President Joe Biden has urged Netanyahu to build consensus before pushing through far-reaching changes, saying in comments published by the New York Times on Sunday that an independent judiciary was one of the foundations of US and Israeli democracy.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Knesset debate over judicial reforms turns chaotic amid renewed protests appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Israeli cabinet unanimously approved on Monday Gali Baharav-Miara as Israel's new attorney general.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

This is the first time a woman is confirmed for this position in Israel. 

Miara, 63, lives in Givatayim and is married to Tzion, who is a former senior security official. She is a mother of three. She served in the Israel Defense Forces Intelligence Directorate's main signal intelligence unit, 8200, and was a senior officer at the directorate's Production and Analysis Division. She went to law school at Tel Aviv University, where she also completed a master's degree in law.

Before joining private practice she worked for three decades at the State Attorney's Office, and reached the position of Tel Aviv district attorney.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett hailed Baharav-Miara as a professional choice and for becoming the first woman to reach that position. "We need a good, strong and serious system that citizens trust. On top of that, the attorney general's most basic role is to help the government implement its policies in accordance with the law." 

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Gali Baharav-Miara named Israel's first female AG appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Ukraine's parliament passed a law Wednesday defining antisemitism and banning it in the country. The bill was approved by 283 votes, pending approval by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to enter into force.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

"The lack of a clear definition of antisemitism in the Ukrainian legislation does not allow for the proper classification of crimes committed on its basis," the lawmakers who authored the bill said.

The law defines antisemitism as hatred of Jews, including attacks on the minority, making false or hateful statements about them, or denying the mass extermination of Ukrainian Jewry during the Holocaust. Damaging buildings and religious institutions also falls under the definition.

As per the new law, victims of antisemitism will be able to claim compensation for moral and material damage.

World Zionist Organization chief Yaakov Hagoel praised the move.

"I commend the Ukrainian parliament on the precedent-setting step. This is an important milestone in the long international struggle" against antisemitism, he said, expressing hope that  Zelensky – who is Jewish - will sign the law, making it "a model for parliaments around the world."

Less than 1% of Ukraine's 40 million citizens are Jewish. This year marks the 80th anniversary of the Babi Yar massacre, where over 30,000 Jews were killed over the course of just two days in a ravine outside Kiev.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Ukraine passes legislation effectively outlawing antisemitism appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Attorney Arnon Ephraim, 71, was stabbed to death in front of his wife in the Haifa suburb of Nesher, Wednesday morning.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

A senior police official told Israel Hayom the investigation into Ephraim's murder would focus at this stage on evidence and intelligence. "This is an individual with no criminal record. A civil lawyer that did not work in the criminal litigation field," the official said.

Senior Magen David Adom medic Leonid Liansky said, "When we arrived at the scene, we saw the victim lying unconscious, without a pulse, not breathing and suffering from deep wounds and bleeding. We performed medical examinations and gave him medical treatment, but the injuries were serious and there was no other choice but to determine his death."

"He was a smart man. I don't care who did this, it won't bring him back. I don't have my husband. I told them to take his organs for donation," Ruth Ephraim, whose husband Arnon was stabbed to death by a masked assailant in his Nesher apartment, Wednesday, said.

"They stabbed him obsessively. I didn't understand what was happening. I was sure they were robbers. I didn't exactly fight, I tried to prevent them from stabbing him with my hand, and at the same time I screamed for my daughter and her husband who live nearby to come. It was all over in 20 seconds, and the suspects got away," she said.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Shocking murder of lawyer perplexes investigators, wife appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Under the agreement, a fraud charge was reduced to a lesser offense. Netanyahu also agreed to pay the state 45,000 shekels ($12,500) in reimbursement and a 10,000 shekel ($2,800) fine.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

According to the original indictment, Netanyahu, along with a government employee, fraudulently obtained from the state hundreds of meals supplied by restaurants, at an estimated cost of more than $100,000, essentially bypassing regulations that prohibit such a practice if a cook is employed at the Prime Minister's Residence.

As part of the revised indictment that was submitted to the court earlier this month, the fraud charge was dropped. Instead, Netanyahu was charged with intentionally exploiting another person's mishandling of state money for her own benefit.

Netanyahu's supporters, including her husband the prime minister, have said that her conduct was not criminal and claimed that even if funds were improperly used, she was not in charge of bookkeeping at the Prime Minister's Residence and hence should not be held accountable.

Her lawyer Yossi Cohen repeated those claims after the court hearing on Sunday, saying the entire case was a "product of ugly and defamatory leaks that were designed to besmirch my client."

"Do you understand what you admitted to?" the judge asked Netanyahu, 60, at the court hearing.

"Yes, I do," she replied, and the judge proceeded to ratify the deal.

In explaining the plea agreement to the court, prosecutors cited Netanyahu's clean record, the public humiliation she has suffered as a result of the case and the time that has passed – up to nine years – since the alleged actions were committed.

The government employee charged along with Netanyahu also reached an agreement with the prosecution and was fined 10,000 shekels ($2,800).

The post Court approves plea bargain as Sara Netanyahu admits to misusing state funds appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.