Nahum Manbar was sentenced to 16 years imprisonment by Tel Aviv District Court today. The sentence was handed down by judges Amnon Strashnov, Zeev Hammer and Shelly Timen after the former refused to disqualify himself yesterday. Manbar, 52, was convicted last month on charges of being in contact with a state at war with Israel and selling Iran chemical and biological warfare. Most of the trial was heard behind closed doors for "state security" reasons.
In passing sentencing, the judges said they were "ignoring all the demons which have emerged during these past few days," and that the sixteen year term was handed down out of "clear and pure motives, ignoring irrelevant and extraneous considerations." Judge Strashnov also said that Manbar suffered from "uncontrollable greed," referring to massive amounts of cash he received for his services to Iran. Shrashnov described the recent scandal as "much ado about nothing." However, he also described Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s comments on Manbar, given after the conviction, but before sentencing, as "out of place."
Businessmen Nahum Manbar was arrested in May 1997 by the GSS and police on his way to Israel from Europe, where he had lived since 1985. He fled Israel, leaving behind massive debts and bad checks, and in recent years lived in Switzerland with his wife Francine.
The court heard that from around 1990, Manbar, a former kibbutznik and IDF combat soldier, began trading with Iran. According to security sources, he initially sold defense devices to Iran, under the watchful eye of Israeli and foreign security and intelligence services. At some period, said sources, greed got the better of him, and he started selling raw materials to Iran for the production of nerve and mustard gas. According to the indictment, he also sold know-how to the Iranians on the production of such biological and chemical warfare, and gave advice on how to set up factories in Iran. Some 150 tons of raw materials were transported to Iran via Europe. Manbar has continually denied the charges.
Following sentencing Manbar’s defense counsel, Adv. Amnon Zichroni described the sentence as "very severe" and promised to appeal to the Supreme Court against " the refusal of Strashnov to disqualify himself, the conviction and sentencing." Zichroni was granted permission for this overall appeal in a ruling by Supreme Court president Justice Aharon Barak, who advised Zichroni to wait until after sentencing following Strashnov’s refusal to disqualify himself.
Prosecutor Devora Chen,who had requested a twenty year sentence, praised the security services for gathering evidence which took years. She also recalled that during the Gulf War in 1991, when the Israeli people were forced to don gas masks and take refuge in sealed rooms from a possible attack of chemical warfare, Manbar was engaged in selling materials for production of that warfare.
In response to accusations that former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin did not investigate Manbar, Chen countered that although Manbar’s deeds were known at the time, there was not sufficient concrete evidence to warrant an indictment.
Speaking on Israel Radio from her home in Switzerland yesterday, Manbar’s wife Francine compared the trial to the "Dreyfuss trial". "My husband is simply a scapegoat," she said. "Why haven’t other businessmen who were and are still trading with Iran been arrested?"
Published by Israel's Business Arena July 16, 1998.
Strashnov Rejects Zichroni’s Recusal Motion in Manbar Trial
By Hadas Magen
Wed. 6:00 pm
"In the defence’s improper allegations against me, there is no truth, no logic, and they amount to gross and clear defamation, through a blatant invasion of privacy and an ugly attempt to besmirch my reputation". This statement came today from Tel-Aviv District Court Judge Amnon Strashnov, in handing down his decision to reject the recusal motion brought by Amnon Zichroni in the Manbar trial. The motion was based on allegations concerning relations conducted by Adv. Peninat Yanai, who was a member of Manbar’s defence team, with Strashnov, previously her principal, during Nahum Manbar’s trial.
According to Strashnov, in his decision, since Yanai had completed her training with him, in March 1997, they had kept up friendly relations of the type customarily effective between a principal and a former articled clerk. These relations had taken the form of telephone calls, and visits by Yanai to Strashnov’s office and at the court.
Strashnov said he was declaring unequivocally and unambiguously that "throughout the trial, and in effect since Adv. Yanai completed her training at my office, and through the training period itself, I had no meeting whatsoever with her, on either legal or other matters, outside the Tel-Aviv District Court building. To dispel any doubt, if anybody has any, Adv. Yanai never directly or indirectly gave me any material relating to the accused’s trial".
Commenting on his alleged telephone conversations with the Prime Minister or any of his assistants, Strashnov stated, in his decision, that the last meeting between the Prime Minister and himself had taken place in February 1997, at a discussion on the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, on the subject of minimal penalties for sex offences. Since that meeting, which took place in a public framework and was documented by the media, and to this very day, Strashnov said, he had not spoken with the Prime Minister or with his spokesman on any subject whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, either by telephone or in direct conversation, either personally or through a messenger.
Strashnov said he did not intend to comment on Yanai’s relationship with the defence lawyers, or on any other relationships Yanai did nor did not conduct with anyone else concerned in the affair.
Strashnov said all the facts constituting the grounds for his alleged incapacity were known to the accused even at the initial stages of the trial, which lasted over a year. The fact that incapacity was not argued at the time, when the main facts were known to the accused, sufficed for the motion to be rejected out of hand.
Strashnov said he would welcome any investigation and examination conducted in the matter, and would make himself available for questioning to whatever extent might be required. At the end of his decision, Judge Strashnov noted that "a person’s reputation and absolute clean-handedness, especially those of a judge, are inalienable assets for him. I have always preserved this asset and will do everything in my power to preserve it as long as I live; and nobody, accused or defending counsel, will take it from me, and will roughly and blatantly trample it public".
Following Strashnov’s decision, Zichroni advanced a second recusal motion, on the grounds that the decision indicates that the defence lawyers had become the opponents of the presiding judge, and could therefore not sentence Manbar.
The judges rejected his motion, on the ground that the court was on the verge of completing the case, and all that was left was the sentencing. To that end, the hearing had been adjourned for a month from the time the verdict was handed down. The judges said that in their opinion, no harm would be done to the accused or to the defence, if the judicial process were to be completed today before the court. This being so, the court began hearing sentencing arguments.
Published by Israel's Business Arena July 15, 1998