US embassy cable - 05TELAVIV4655

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 004655 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/26/2015 
TAGS: PGOV, PHUM, IS, GOI INTERNAL 
SUBJECT: MK OMRI SHARON NEARS POSSIBLE PLEA BARGAIN AS NEW 
LAW REMOVES AUTOMATIC PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer for reasons 1.4 (b,d). 
 
1.  (C) SUMMARY. Prime Minister Sharon's son Omri, a Likud MK 
since 2003, is nearing a plea bargain with Attorney General 
Menachem Mazuz over charges related to his role in the 
alleged illegal financing of Prime Minister Sharon's 1999 
leadership campaign for the Likud Party.  A political and 
legal controversy has erupted over whether Mazuz should offer 
Omri Sharon a deal without taking him to trial, where details 
of PM Sharon's involvement could be exposed.  Mazuz is 
reportedly considering whether to charge Omri with criminal 
fraud, which carries a maximum of seven years in jail, or 
charge him only for violations of the campaign finance laws, 
which carries only a fine.  Omri's case has gotten mixed up 
with legislation passed by the Knesset July 25 that removes 
automatic parliamentary immunity for MKs from prosecution, 
and requires that they petition the Knesset to keep their 
immunity.  According to media and Embassy sources, however, 
Omri Sharon has already indicated that he would not have 
opposed the lifting of his parliamentary immunity. END 
SUMMARY. 
 
------------------ 
Omri the Fall Guy? 
------------------ 
 
2.  (C) Attorney General Mazuz decided February 17, 2005 that 
he would recommend that Omri Sharon be indicted, while at the 
same time deciding to close the file against Prime Minister 
Sharon and his top aides (including Senior Advisor Dov 
Weissglas) finding that, "There is not enough evidence to 
prove that Sharon was aware of the secret funding... and the 
violation of the law...."  Israeli NGO Movement for Quality 
in Government (MQG) attorney Daniel Kayros told Poloff July 
26 that, in essence, Omri became the "fall guy," and was left 
holding the bag for alleged campaign finance violations and 
criminal fraud associated with his father's 1999 campaign. 
 
---------------------------------------- 
Plea Bargain and What's under the Carpet 
---------------------------------------- 
 
3.  (C) With word out that Omri may be reaching a deal with 
Mazuz, media pundits, some of PM Sharon's political 
opponents, and MQG have criticized Mazuz for indicating he 
will not go to trial.   According to Kolev, "Omri has already 
declared he is not hiding behind (parliamentary) 
immunity...that he would give it up."  Kolev said that Omri 
is now in the final days of bargaining with the AG over the 
charges and the sentence.  Attorney Kayros told Poloff that 
MQG has sent a letter to Mazuz requesting that Mazuz not 
accept a plea bargain, and take Omri to trial instead.  "The 
content of what will not be brought before the court is 
extremely important" to the public interest, according to 
Kayros.  Kayros asserted that the public has the right to 
know whether Prime Minister Sharon had been involved in the 
alleged campaign financing scam.  Yahad/Meretz MK Yossi Sarid 
and Shinui MK Ilan Shalgi have reportedly called on Mazuz not 
to accept a plea bargain, but to take Omri to trial in order 
to bring to light any involvement of Prime Minister Sharon in 
the campaign financing case. 
 
-------------------------------- 
Implications of New Immunity Law 
-------------------------------- 
 
4.  (C) According to the MQG attorneys, the larger legal 
issue that has been lost in the media's reporting on the new 
law and on Omri, is how the law would actually broaden the 
Knesset's role in deciding whether or not to lift an MK's 
immunity.  While the new law removes automatic immunity of an 
MK, and places the onus on the MK to apply for immunity with 
the Knesset, the MQG lawyers argue that the law actually 
affords MKs and the Knesset additional reasons on which to 
base a decision not to strip an MK's immunity, such as that 
the MK already has faced disciplinary action, or that a 
criminal trial is not in the public interest. 
 
5.  (C) MQG attorney Kayros pointed out that the new law was 
actually "born in the sin of the Gorlovsky case."  In this 
case, the Knesset refused to lift the parliamentary immunity 
of Likud MK Michael Gorlovsky for his unauthorized voting for 
an absent MK colleague in a May 2003 Knesset vote. 
Notwithstanding the High Court decision in June that the 
Knesset's decision was illegal, the Knesset House Committee 
voted against lifting Gorlovsky's immunity.  The High Court 
reasoned that the Knesset should only grant immunity to 
protect an MK against politically motivated prosecution or 
where the government was trying to prevent an MK from 
fulfilling his/her Knesset duties, and not to shield 
lawbreakers.  Pursuant to the new law, Kolev argues, the 
Knesset is placing itself more in the role of judicial 
authority than lawmaker.  MQG has appealed the Knesset's 
decision to the High Court. 
 
********************************************* ******************** 
Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv 
 
You can also access this site through the State Department's 
Classified SIPRNET website. 
********************************************* ******************** 
KURTZER