Likud Central Committee Vote: Potential for Serious Offenses – But Hard to Prove | Attorney Guy Shinar
The Likud party court is deliberating over more than ten petitions regarding the central committee vote, after discrepancies emerged between the protocols and allegations of forgery. Initially, a proposal was recorded as passing by a majority of five votes, but in the final protocol the margin stood at two. It is also being examined how Netanyahu was registered as a voter, despite not arriving at the polling station; the Likud stated that a personal ballot was brought to him. Attorney Guy Shinar analyzes the potential for criminal offenses and the difficulty of proving them.
The Likud party court is deliberating over more than ten petitions regarding the central committee vote, after discrepancies emerged between the protocols and allegations of forgery. Two particularly troubling facts: initially, a controversial proposal was recorded as passing by a majority of five votes, but in the final protocol the margin was only two votes. Additionally, it is being examined how party chairman Benjamin Netanyahu was registered as a voter, despite not arriving at the polling station; the Likud stated that a personal ballot was brought to him. Attorney Guy Shinar writes that the alleged acts are not merely "irregularities" but may constitute criminal offenses under Section 28(a) of the Parties Law, carrying a one-year prison sentence, including unlawfully altering or adding to the list of those entitled to vote and interfering with the vote count. However, the distance from suspicion to conviction is great: the explanation of a personal ballot does not contradict the data, and it will be examined whether the regulations permit this. The vote is on regulations, not on a position, and may not fall under "internal elections" as defined by law. These offenses require criminal intent, and a discrepancy between protocols could stem from human error. Shinar emphasizes that the court's examination is the main thing, since when a result is decided by two votes, any flaw becomes substantive, and the appearance of things has already been damaged.