The Ministry of Defense has a problem with the OECD's demand that Israel abolish the ministry's right to censor the results of investigations of bribes paid by Israeli companies to officials.
Officially, the Ministry of Defense security officer does not open an investigation without a go-ahead from the Israel Police and State Prosecutor, and police and State Prosecutor investigators are supposed to accompany all ministry investigations. In practice, the Ministry of Defense conducts its own investigations, sometimes in cooperation with the ministry's exports regulator, which was set up several years ago to scrupulously record every arms transaction to and from Israel. The Ministry of Defense security officer then sends its report and recommendations to the State Prosecutor, who decides whether or not to file an indictment.
During an ongoing investigation, the Ministry of Defense makes no public statements. The official argument is that a complaint may be false, or an attempt to slander the country, or a rival defense contractor, or it may be related to a commercial dispute in the target country. The ministry argues that disclosing an ongoing investigation is liable to cause financial damage to the relevant company, which would expose the ministry to claims for damages.
However, even when an indictment is filed, the Ministry of Defense security officer has the right to ask the military censor to censor the case on the grounds of national security and foreign relations. These are broad and flexible grounds, with no clear definitions. It is enough for the Ministry of Defense security officer to claim that, on the basis of information in its possession, the very disclosure of a case, whether or not it is case of bribery or a commercial dispute, is liable to harm Israel's foreign relations, and the censor wields his black pen.
Ministry of Defense officials claim that the military censor is trigger happy in cases of censoring reports about defense contracts, including censoring the names of countries, the products involved, and the value of the deal. The sources say that full immunity has been granted over the years on the findings of investigations into cases of bribery, and the complainant, for reasons of national security, is not notified about the results of his complaint. Again, the grounds for this secrecy are national security.
Ministry of Defense officials claim that if Israel complies with the OECD's demand for disclose, this is liable to severely damage Israel's defense exports, because such disclosure will reveal commercial secrets to competitors in other countries about the scale of Israel's defense industries, enabling the competitors, at the transaction, commercial, and political levels, to act against Israeli interests.
Published by Globes [online], Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on January 18, 2010
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd. 2010