The State Comptroller’s report concerning Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s maneuvers to change Israel Land Administration (ILA) Resolution 755, which involved a conflict of interest, and violated the State Comptroller’s directive, is based on an investigation begun following a “Globes” investigation published on September 19, 2002. The State Comptroller has confirmed the “Globes” report.
Resolution 755 bars owners of holdings in moshavim (cooperative settlements) from engaging in partnerships or leases for agricultural structures on Section A of the holding, surrounding the residence. The State Comptroller’s report determines that Sharon “acted behind the scenes” to alter Resolution 755 to enable those with holdings in moshavim to lease them and engage in partnerships involving these agricultural structures. The “Globes” investigation reported that Sharon personally called Ministry of National Infrastructures director general Yaacov Efrati, the ILA director general’s superior, and asked that Resolution 755 be altered to relax the restrictions on those with moshav holdings.
State Comptroller and Public Complaints Commissioner Eliezer Goldberg is responsible for enforcing the Asher committee rules designed to prevent conflicts of interest. He began investigating Sharon’s actions as early as December 2001, following the first report in “Globes, which revealed that Sharon directly owned part of the family holding in Moshav Kfar Malal, while representing his share as the property of MK Omri Sharon, his son.
Following an exchange of letters between the prime minister and Goldberg on the matter, on January 24, 2002, Goldberg explicitly forbade Ariel Sharon from dealing in agricultural land issues, and rejected Sharon’s appeal against the ban.
Ariel Sharon was entitled to ask for special permission from the relevant committee in the State Comptroller’s Office to deal in agricultural land issues, but he did not do so, and received no such permission. The State Comptroller’s ruling therefore become absolute.
Goldberg writes: “The rules bar the prime minister from participating ‘in any way whatsoever’ in decision-making about agricultural land. As will be described below, however, the prime minister directly promoted a an agricultural land resolution that would directly benefit himself and a member of his family.”
The report makes clear that the initiative to change the resolution came from former Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Shalom Simhon, who is also linked to a holding in Even Menachem. Simhon pressured the ILA, and asked for a meeting with Sharon in August 2002.
Goldberg writes, “The minutes of the meeting clearly indicate that the prime minister clearly wanted the resolution to be changed to benefit the farmers. Furthermore, it was learned that during the meeting, the prime minister telephoned the ILA director general, and asked him to support a proposal to change the resolution.
”By doing so, the prime minister violated both the rules forbidding him from participating in decisions on the issue, and the State Comptroller’s directive. The prime minister had a personal interest and a conflict of interest. The change he tried to promote could have bolstered his and his family’s rights.”
Goldberg stressed that Sharon was aware of the State Comptroller’s directive barring his involvement, and stated, “This affair shows that the prime minister was aware that he must not deal with this matter. In all matters pertaining to his public actions, he complied with the ban, but behind the scenes, he acted to change the resolution.”
Goldberg presented Sharon’s position, as stated by his legal advisor: “The prime minister honestly believed that fulfilling Simhon’s request was not included in the actions forbidden to him, as opposed to taking part in an ILA discussion or decision. The prime minister, who serves as ILA chairman, regarded the putting of the issue on the ILA agenda as a purely technical affair. It should therefore not be concluded that the prime minister tried to play a material role in decisions about agricultural land, or affect their content.”
The State Comptroller does not accept this explanation. “The State Comptroller believes that the minutes of the prime minister’s August 20, 2002 meeting with the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, and his request that day that the ILA director general support the proposal to change the decision, show the prime minister’s involvement in amending the resolution is far from ‘a purely technical affair’.”
After the September 19, 2002 “Globes” report, which revealed Sharon’s conversation with Efrati, Sharon gave responsibility for the matter to Prime Minister's Office director general Avigdor Yitzhaki. The State Comptroller comments on this: “The prime minister’s instructions to the director general of his office to assume responsibility for the matter in his stead were also improper. The director general’s position gives him no independent authority to deal with this issue, and certainly not to issue orders to the ILA director general, who is subordinate to the responsible minister (the Minister of National Infrastructures, who at the time was the prime minister). The Knesset approved the transfer of the ILA from the authority of the Minister of National Infrastructures (the responsible minister) and the Ministry of National Infrastructures to that of the prime minister and Prime Minister’s Office only a few days later, on September 18, 2002. If the intention was that the Prime Minister’s Office director general would handle the issue on behalf of the prime minister, this would in any case not solve the conflict of interest.”
The prime minister’s legal advisor gave the following explanation: “The prime minister wished to distance himself from a possible conflict of interest, and therefore delegated the authority to discuss and treat matters pertaining to the formulating of land policy to the Prime Minister’s office director general, believing that he would thereby prevent any possible conflict of interest.
”In view of the State Comptroller’s remarks, however, the prime minister recognizes that the delegation of authority may have been irregular. For that reason, as soon as a new government is formed, the prime minister will transfer or delegate to another minister his authority in respect of issues which a possible conflict of interest prevents him from handling.”
The State Comptroller’s report concludes with these words: “The State Comptroller states that the ban on actions in situations involving a conflict of interest is a foundation of for proper administration. These compulsory public and legal norms rules are also reflected in the regulations, whose restrictions should be scrupulously observed, in both public and confidential actions. Such care is required of every public servant, particularly the prime minister.”
Published by Globes [online] - www.globes.co.il - on April 30, 2003