Human Rights Alert NGO

הארגון הלא ממשלתי עוסק בניטור זכויות האדם בישראל, סדרי המשטר הדמוקרטי ומוסדותיו - בפרט מערכת המשפט ואכיפת החוק. הארגון פעיל במיוחד בחקר תקינותן וישרתן של מערכות מידע ממשלתיות. עיקר פעולתה של העמותה בגילוי, ארכיונאות והפצת מסמכים, דוחות, מאמרים, פרסומים בתקשורת, הופעות בכנסים בתחומים אלה, וכן - בפעולות משפטיות הנדרשות.

Tuesday, January 1, 2019

2019-01-01 Judge Poznansky: Beyond texting - systematic fabrication of court records

Judge Poznansky: Beyond texting - systematic fabrication of court records
The High Court of Justice has recently overturned Judge Poznansky's dismissal in the "Texting Affair".  However, before the Justices, who ruled in the case, was additional evidence, filed by jailed blogger Lori Shem-Tov: Judge Poznansky engaged in systematic fabrication of court records in collusion with the Tel-Aviv Police in search and seizure processes.  "Texting" with the police prosecutor before a hearing was only the tip of the iceberg... Justices Fogelman, Solberg and Barak-Erez chose to overlook the evidence, and summarily dismissed Lori Shem-Tov's motion to intervene...
Included in Shem-Tov's evidence was a case where Poznansky effectively became part of the Tel-Aviv Police team in an "investigation trick" and deliberately issued a fake subpoena on WORDPRESS.COM.  The Request to Inspect, which has been filed today, seeks to review the respective electronic court file. The entire court file is now hidden under unlawful "Administrative Sealing"...
Judge Poznansky's "Texting Affair" is similar or worse than Judge Alshech's "Fabricated Protocols Affair".  In the Judge Alshech affair the public was sleeping while on duty... The public should stand up for its rights in the case of Judge Poznansky.  
Figures. Jailed blogger Lori Shem-Tov and texting Judge Poznansky
Figures.  Justices Fogelman, Solberg and Barak-Erez 

Figure. Fictitious Document Subpoena on WORDPRESS.COM, issued by Judge Poznansky as part of an "investigation trick".
Request to inspect, filed today in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court
Regulations of the Courts – Inspection of Court Files (2003); Form 2 (Regulation 4(c))
Request to Inspect Court File
1. Requester's Details
a) Full name:  Joseph Zernik, PhD
b) ID No: 
c) Address:  PO Box 33407, Tel-Aviv
d) Telephone:  None
2. Court File Details
a) Court File Number:
12718-12-15 in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court
b) Parties:
Tel-Aviv Police v
c) Records, which are subject of the request:
(1) Any authentic court record, which is a duly made and entered Publication Prohibition Warrant, if it exists at all in instant court file;
(2) Any authentic court record, which is a duly made and entered Order for Production of Documents (subpoena) against WORDPRESS.COM, if it exists at all in instant court file;
(3) Duly made, “Decisions Docket”, “Judgments Docket”, and “Case Calendar” in instant court file.
3. Purpose and Justification for the Inspection 
a) Instant Request is filed under duress. The Regulations of the Court- Inspection of Court Files (2003), Regulation 2(b) says: “Any person is permitted to inspect orders that are not lawfully prohibited for publication”.  However, as outlined below, instant court file is apparently held under “Administrative Sealing” in Net-HaMishpat – public access system.  Therefore, there is no way to exercise the inspection without filing instant request.
b) In court records and elsewhere, a document was published, which appears as a document subpoena against WORDPRESS.COM, which was issued on December 07, 2015, in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court.  However, the document is vague, and it is impossible to ascertain, whether it is an authentic court record. On the face of such document, a number appears in hand-writing, which appears as a court file number in Net-HaMishpat system, and the number matches the date of the purported subpoena (Figure 1).

Figure 1.
c) Attempt to inspect the respective court file in Net-HaMishpat- public access system – shows that the court file is blocked to public access with the notice: “The user is not permitted to view instant court file” (Figure 2).  However, such notice does not provide a lawful reference for sealing in instant court file.
Figure 2.
d) Even if there were a cause for sealing instant court file at the time of issuing the warrant, it is self-evident that today there is no cause for ongoing sealing in instant court file, since the purported warrant has already been exercised and published.
e) The Requester’s core research pertains to e-government, government cyber operations, and their implications relative to Human Rights, Civil Society, and Democratic Institutions. 
His work won appreciation in Israel and abroad:
  • Prof Uzzi Ornan - “All power to you! I hope that you see your tremendous efforts reach fruition!”
  • Attorney Avigdor Feldman - “In my opinion you are doing very important work… thank you for your thorough and persistent work”.
  • Prof Amnon Shashua, Mobileye Co-founder - “… very important work”.
  • International experts, as part of anonymous peer-review - “… challenges current thinking in the field”.
Four (4) submissions, authored by Dr Zernik and submitted under Human Rights Alert - NGO, were incorporated into UN Human Rights Council Periodic Reports regarding the US (2010, 2015) and Israel (2013, 2018).  
The 2018 High Commissioner’s report on Israel included the following note:
24. HRA-NGO highlighted the serious deterioration in integrity of law and justice agencies as a consequence of the implementation of e-government systems. It affirmed that the validity and integrity of any legal and judicial records of Israel should be deemed dubious at best.
His research has been presented and published in international academic conferences, including Data Mining (2010), Criminology (2012), E-government (2015, 2016, 2017, 2018), Cyber and Law (2019) and were also cited in a textbook on “Machine Learning”:
Data mining of government records - particularly records of the justice system (i.e., courts, prisons) - enables the discovery of systemic human rights violations in connection to generation and publication of invalid or fraudulent legal records by various government agencies.
f) The requests to inspect and judicial decisions in the matter of such requests generate important research data in themselves, relative to the nature of the decisions, their due entry, service, etc.
4. Requester’s relationship to instant court file (direct /indirect)
The Requester published a media report on similar matters  in 2016 in the US [1].
5. Service on parties and on the Requester
The Court is asked to serve instant Request on the parties, together with an order, instructing them to file their responses and serve them on the Requester.  The Court is requested to duly serve its decisions on instant Request.
Date: January 01, 2019 _______________
Joseph Zernik, PhD - Requester of Inspection
Human Rights Alert – NGO (AR 80654598)
[1] US DHS assists in suppression of anti-corruption dissent in Israel

No comments:

Post a Comment