🚨 Disclosure: new details about the debate between Zini and the ombudsman and Solberg's compromise in the wording of the statement.
Zini demanded that the entire investigation into the election case be defined in advance under the classification of security offenses and thus use extensive Shin Bet tools in the investigation.
The prosecutor refused a sweeping confirmation that there is a criminal level; "It's illegal, the evidence will not be admissible."
The prosecutor told Zini that "I will give all the tools that the law allows" and that it will be possible to use the expanded tools if a basis for suspicion of security offenses is presented, but not every suspicion of receiving money in the elections is security-related but criminal, so that not every suspicion can be comprehensively used against all the Shin Bet's tools.
The dispute reached the wording of the joint statement.
Zini demanded that the joint statement include that it is a suspicion of security offenses only, the Ya'amishite objected.
Solberg presented a compromise according to which it would be written that the suspicions "may have a security aspect."
The full details: