r

Human Rights Alert, NGO

Joseph Zernik, PhD 3144PO Box 31440, Jerusalem 91313

" 91313 ,31440 "

123456xyz@gmail.com;

13-05-22 In re: RSZ (25607-03-13) in the Haifa Magistrate Court Repeat Request to Inspect and to Copy, alternatively Notice of Inspection of Court Records
The Repeat Request may be the first of its kind in Israel pertaining to electronic signatures of the Israeli courts. Whichever it is decided, it would have significant impact on the integrity of the Israeli courts.

Record
12-13-05-22 In re: RSZ (25607-03-13) in the Haifa Magistrate Court Repeat 1

Page # 2

Request to Inspect and to Copy, alternatively Notice of Inspection of Court Records [English translation]

2 13-05-22 In re: RSZ (25607-03-13) in the Haifa Magistrate Court Repeat

Request to Inspect and to Copy, alternatively Notice of Inspection of Court Records [Hebrew original]

LINKS:
[1] 13-05-22 Declaration of the Consevatee's son - Judge Esperanza Alon - Master of "Mystic secrets of court procedures", or 'obstructionist with impunity'? [Heb + Eng] http://www.scribd.com/doc/143291344/ [2] 13-05-22 In RE: RSZ (1829-06-10 ) in the Haifa Magistrate Court - Repeat Request to Inspect Court Records http://www.scribd.com/doc/143581201/ [3] 13-05-22 In RE: RSZ (25607-03-13 ) in the Haifa Magistrate Court - Repeat Request to Inspect Court Records http://www.scribd.com/doc/143581755/

1/3

In the Haifa Family Court 1829-06-10 In RE: Conservatee RSZ Filer: The Consevatee's son, Joseph Zernik Parties (to the best understanding of the Filer): 1. Conservator Robert Zernik, through his Counsel Attorney Amos Zadika 2. The State Attorney's Counsel Ministry of Justice 3. The State Attorney's Counsel Ministry of Welfare Other Conservatee's children: 1. Dror Zernik Conservatee's son 2. Uri Zernik Consevatee's son RE: Repeat Request to Inspect, alternatively, Notice of Inspection, pursuant to the Regulations of the Court (Office of the Clerk) -2004, and Israeli Supreme Court Decision in Israeli Civil Rights Association v Minister of Justice (5917/97)

I, the undersigned, Joseph Zernik, ID no... , knowing that I must say the truth, and that I may be punished pursuant to the law if I fail to do so, declare as follows: 1. The undersigned, Dr Joseph Zernik, files herein a Repeat Request to Inspect, alternatively, Notice of Inspection, as detailed below; a. Justification of the Request to Inspect 2. I am the Conservatee's son. 3. I am the Conservator's son. 4. In 2010 I was asked to provide my consent to the Conservatorship under court file 1829-06-10. 5. In December 2012 I requested to inspect the related court file 1829-06-10, and my Request was granted by Presiding Judge of the Court Ehud Rekem. 6. On April 29, 2013, I filed a second Request to Inspect instant court file, including, but not limited to: General Details, Parties, Related Files, lists of records. 7. Regarding my April 29, 2013 Request, I received a decision by Judge Alon, dated May 2, 2013, which says: In this court file, the Requester is a party to the process. Pursuant to the principles of transparency and equality among the parties, he is entitled to received motions, responses, and decisions and pursuant to court procedures [sic jz] The request to obtain screen prints is out of compliance with court procedures and is denied. 8. The May 2, 2013 Decision, referenced above, is baseless in its part and as a whole: a. In this court file, the Requester is a party to the process. - Judge Alon does not explain the legal foundation for such statement. 2/3

b. Pursuant to the principles of transparency and equality among the parties, - if Judge Alon's intent was indeed to establish transparency and equality among the parties, all she had to do was key in my ID number into the system as Counsel, or Of Interest, who is permitted to inspect the records through Net HaMishpat, like the Conservator's Counsel. As of May 21, 2013, after entering my ID number and the court file number, the message appears The User is not permitted to view this court file. c. The request to obtain screen prints is out of compliance with court procedures - such statement is pure fibulation: - In Moshe Katzav v State of Israel (3372/11) in the Israeli Supreme Court, I was permitted to obtain print screens following a request to inspect. - In the related court file 1829-06-10 in this Court, I obtained print screens from Chief Clerk Israel Hen. 9. Therefore, I file again the Request to Inspect, includign the items listed in 6., above. 10. Additionally, I request to inspect the two different and contradictory May 17, 2013 decision records in instant court file, including: a. The electronic signature, if any created, User's Name and Time of Signature. b. Audit Data, pertaining to entering the record into the system: User's Name and Login Time. b. Alternatively, Notice of Inspection 11. Alternatively, since Judge Alon says that I am a party in this court file, I herein provide Notice of Inspection, to be conducted next week, during working hours of the Office of the Clerk, including all records, listed above. 12. Given that the right to access court records is fundamental to Due Process and Human Rights, Judge Alon is kindly requested to provide detailed justification for her decision, which may need to be brought before other instances. Today, May 22, 2013, [signature] _____________ Joseph Zernik Consevatee's Son

3/3

 " , " " , . 21- ,2013 , " " , ". " . " - : ) (3372/11 . ) (1829-06-10 , " " . .9 , , 6- , . .10 , 17-, ,2013 ,: . , , . . " ) (Login . . , .11 , , , . .12 , , . , 22-,2013 ,

_______________ '

2/2