Stopping Ministerial Corruption: Full Financial Disclosure

Israel is not a Third World country by any means. But in one category, it’s up there with the worst: ministerial corruption, including the very top of the governmental pyramid. It’s an embarrassment for a nation with great pride that succeeded in pulling itself up by the bootstraps to join the developed world, and in some areas to actually be one of its leading lights.

How can it mostly remove this blight? The solution is quite simple, albeit sounding “radical”: legislate continuing full financial disclosure of every and all government ministers (and their respective spouses).

The palpable need for an effective solution is clear. Here’s a very incomplete list of Israel’s ministerial, financial corruption – past and present. In the 1970s, Housing Minister Avraham Ofer (who committed suicide before the investigation was completed) was part of a wider affair involving (the largest HMO) Kupat Kholim Clalit in which its CEO Asher Yadlin was convicted and jailed. The decade’s most famous case occurred soon after: PM Rabin’s wife Leah was found to have a (back then) illegal bank account in America, over which Rabin resigned his prime ministerial position.

Skipping to the new century, Finance Minister (2006-2007) Avraham Hirschson was convicted and sent to jail in 2009 for stealing money from the Workers Histadrut Leumit union. At about the same time, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was found guilty of accepting bribes (when he was Jerusalem mayor) and received jail time.

Moving ahead, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s triple indictment and trial need not be recapitulated here, but a thorough investigation of his various bank/investment accounts would be useful in getting to the bottom of the “Submarine Affair,” for which he has not (yet?) been indicted: why did he agree to Israel purchasing a nuclear submarine that the entire defense establishment said was not needed?

Currently, the beat goes on: Social Equality Minister Mai Golan is suspected of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust; the bribery trial of David Bitan, Chairman of the Knesset Economics Committee, will start this coming September (he’s accused of taking 715,000 shekels in bribes). And while not “ministerial” (but probably even worse) is the Qatargate scandal within the prime minister’s office – too complex to detail here, but jaw-droppingly awful, if proven true (for a detailed account of Qatargate, see: https://www.timesofisrael.com/qatargate-explaining-the-suspicions-and-possible-criminal-acts-roiling-the-pms-office/).

Full financial disclosure would involve three stages, of which only the second exists today – and that only in part. First, complete transparency regarding all the wealth and financial assets of any announced minister before the government is sworn into office (it would be worthwhile adding all Knesset Committee chairpersons to this policy, given their enormous power over the purse strings in their bailiwick). As to candidates for prime minister, such full disclosure should be required for the head of every official political party running in the election campaign. (As Naftali Bennett became prime minister in 2021 despite his party having only seven Knesset seats, any party leader could in theory become prime minister.)
The second stage would last as long as an individual served in a ministerial position. The present law (1958) gives the State Comptroller the authority to check any government official’s bank and investment accounts, and then report the findings to the Knesset, the police, and/or to the public. However, this happens only when suspicions arise; clever corrupt politicians generally know how to hide their transgression. The law should be amended mandating that office to annually check those ministers’ accounts and any other “wealth storage” possibilities. Moreover, the State Comptroller today has no judicial teeth but can only report findings. At the very least, the law could add a proviso that a minister hiding (not reporting) any such wealth accounts would automatically (albeit temporarily) suspend the minister from office, pending the outcome of a police investigation.

A third stage would prevent “buy now, pay later” corruption: all the investigative powers granted in the second stage would continue for two years after the minister left the government, this to prevent corrupt practices today for future remuneration.
One might argue that such an “invasion of privacy” is too onerous a burden for public servants. First, as noted in stage two above, this already exists albeit in minimal form. However, the real issue here is “philosophical”: they are public servants. As such, the public is “the boss” and has the full right to ensure that their “employees” (the ministers) are performing as they should. No one is forcing a minister to take the job of “working for the people.” If their financial privacy is more important than public service, that’s a fair enough personal decision; go find somewhere else to work – there are plenty of other “jobs” out there.

Parenthetically, it should be noted that the idea of full disclosure need not be restricted only to financial affairs. As I wrote here over a year ago (https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/when-a-country-leaders-health-goes-downhill/) the prime minister’s health (probably that of the Defense and Finance Ministers too) should also be completely transparent to the public, given how problematic mental or physical decline is for the proper governance of a complex country such as Israel (e.g., Menachem Begin, Ariel Sharon, and lately PM Netanyahu’s prostate removal and other temporary illnesses).

A policy of full financial transparency would have two ancillary ramifications. First, in today’s world where trust in government is in serious decline, any attempt to resuscitate trust – the foundation upon which democracy rests – has to include the public’s ability to see that its leaders aren’t using their powerful position for economic self-aggrandizement. Thus, the issue isn’t so much “loss of public funds” (although that could become significant if unchecked), but rather something far more invaluable: the citizenry’s belief that the democratic system is fair.

The second effect of full financial transparency would have another very positive consequence: politicians with a penchant for corruption would be loath to reach the highest level of government, knowing that their personal financial shenanigans can be more easily revealed. This would upgrade the quality of ministerial candidates by self-neutralizing the rotten apples that look appetizing from the outside.

Assuming Israel’s next government is not run by Netanyahu, the new leadership would have the opportunity to institute structural change (e.g., a full Constitution; reinforcing judicial independence; two-term limit for the PM), including transparency policies. Israeli democracy is moving towards kleptocracy; the next election might be the last chance to heal our body politic.