The IEC responds to allegations of “aggressive involvement of political considerations” at the top of the company, the same week as its designated chairman, Dov Bahrav, in his scathing resignation letter. , Karin Elharar, in which she mostly disavowed the rabbi’s claims – but in the enclave also indirectly admitted to the strange conduct of the state company.
“First of all, I would like to point out that we were surprised by Mr. Bahrav’s letter of resignation, and especially the serious allegations regarding the lack of proper management of the Electric Company,” the attorney general opened her letter to Sarah, who last night demanded the company’s response to the rabbi’s allegations. Nevo wanted to clarify “that both the procedure for locating the CEO and the procedure for locating the secretary of the board of directors (which the rabbi noted in his letter – AD) were conducted in a professional, proper, decent and proper, equitable and transparent manner, documented and reasoned.” And its guidelines and / or company procedures. “
But towards the end of the IEC’s legal defense letter, there is a statement that settles the battle of versions that has been conducted in recent days regarding the background to the rabbi’s early resignation, even before he took office. And this decision does not put the electricity company in a particularly positive light.
The rabbi resigned one day before the IEC was expected to appoint Moore Halutz, who was Yuval Steinitz’s chief of staff during his tenure as energy minister, as secretary of the board. The rabbi asked to delay the appointment process and leave the current secretary, Nir Goldstein, so that he could enter the position with an experienced secretary by his side, and so that he could later promote himself in a search process for the position of secretary. Goldstein granted the rabbi’s request, but then the controversy began: Is it possible to stop the search for a new secretary that began in March?
It was only after Bahrav’s resignation that it was decided to suspend Halutz’s appointment
According to one of the versions, which was raised by Halutz’s supporters, after members of the board of directors asked the ombudsman to find out whether Bahrav had the authority to revoke Halutz’s appointment, he realized that he could not carry it out. However, this version was refuted by the attorney general.
Adv. Nevo writes: “On Wednesday 13/4/22 the three leading candidates were interviewed by the designated chairman and CEO. This stage was the last stage in the procedure before the winner was announced and the procedure was conducted properly and professionally. After this date it took place. Substantial change in circumstances when Mr. Spiegler was elected CEO.
“In view of this election, I was contacted on 17/4/22 by the Chairman of the Designated Board of Directors and presented with material considerations regarding his desire to retain the current Secretary of the Board, in view of the need to preserve organizational knowledge and centers of knowledge and experience.” Mr. Bahrav himself is external to the Company and in the absence of an Assistant Chairman. On the said decision as long as it is attacked in court. “
That is, if the attorney general had authorized the rabbi to keep veteran secretary Goldstein, why did he not succeed? As reported in Globes, sources close to the process explained that Ofer Bloch, the outgoing CEO of the company, refused to stop the process of appointing Halutz and even threatened to issue an external opinion that would bypass the opinion of the company’s legal adviser. For now, the appointment of Halutz.
Further evidence of a storm created in the Electric Company over the position of secretary or secretary of the board can be found in another part of Nevo Lahler’s letter: “At the same time, and given the lessons learned The company’s procedure, so that it will ensure the chairman’s involvement in the election also in future procedures for this position. “