The List of Charges Against Mordechai Vanunu
Mar 17 2005
Translated by Rayna Moss
In the Magistrates Court in Jerusalem
Criminal File ____-3/05
The State of Israel
Represented by the State Attorney’s Office
Beit Mitzpe, 1 Hasorag St., Jerusalem
ID No. 68411933
Father’s name: Shlomo
Residing at the guest house adjacent to St. George’s Church
Salah a-Din St., Jerusalem
The Defendant is hereby charged as follows:
I. The Facts:
1. On April 19, 2004,
Brigadier Yair Naveh, “the military commander,” in
the terms of the Defense Regulations (State of Emergency), 1945, Commander
of the Homeland Command of the Israel Defense Forces at the time (hereinafter: “the
Brigadier”), issued, by power of his authority according to Regulation
6(2) and Regulations 108, 109 and 110 of the Defense Regulations (State of
Emergency), 1945, a “Restriction and Monitoring Order” concerning
the Defendant (hereinafter: “the Order”). The full text of the
Order is attached hereto and constitutes part of the description of the facts
that constitute the offenses (marked “A”).
2. According to the Order,
the Defendant was prohibited, unless he received prior permission, “to maintain contacts or exchange information, by any
means whatsoever, with foreign citizens or residents.” In addition, he
was prohibited from participating in internet “chats”. The Defendant
was ordered to give prior notice to the police of his intention to leave the
boundaries of the city in which he resided. He was also prohibited, without
prior permission, from coming within 500 meters of places from which it is
possible to leave Israel, including the territories of Judea and Samaria. It
was noted in the Order, that in any event in which the defendant had doubts
concerning the restrictions that were imposed on him by means of the Order,
he was obliged to refer in this matter to the commander of the police station
closest to his place of residence, in order to receive clarifications.
3. Prior to the publication
of the Order, notice was given to the Defendant concerning the intention
to issue same. On April 18, 2004, the Defendant’s
attorney sent to the Brigadier, a letter of reservations against the intention
to issue the Order. Therein it was argued, on behalf of the Defendant, that
it was technically impossible to comply with the prohibition, since the Defendant
could not ask every person he met in the street for their passport. On April
19, 2004, the Brigadier sent a response to the reservations concerning the
Order (hereinafter: “the Letter of Response”). In Section 31 of
the Letter of Response, the Brigadier clarified the prohibition on maintaining “contacts
or exchange of information, with foreign citizens or foreign residents.” Furthermore,
the Brigadier emphasized, that in any situation in which the Defendant wished
to make contact with a person whose citizenship he did not know with certainty,
or in any situation in which a person who was unfamiliar to him tried to make
contact with him, or exchange information with him, he must first ascertain
the identity of same in a positive manner, by means of initial clarification
questions, such as: name, address, citizenship, etc. The Brigadier explained,
that naturally, if the Defendant was approached by a person speaking a foreign
language, that should raise the Defendant’s suspicions, that the person
was a foreign national. The Letter of Reservations concerning the Order and
the Brigadier’s Response to the reservations, are attached hereto as
part of the facts that constitute the offenses (marked “B” and “C”,
4. On April 19, 2004, the Order was served to the Defendant.
5. The Defendant placed the Restriction and Monitoring Order under the review
of the High Court of Justice (HCJ 5211/04), and the Court confirmed the validity
of the Order in a ruling given on July 26, 2004, in the presence of the Defendant.
6. On October 20, 2004, the Brigadier extended the validity of the Order for
an additional period of six months, by means of an additional order that he
publicized (hereinafter: “the Order of Extension”). The Order of
Extension was also preceded by notification to the Defendant, concerning the
intention to extend the validity of the Order. The Defendant, through his attorney,
sent his reservations to the Brigadier. The “Order of Extension” and
the notice of ways of contacting the Israel Police concerning the provisions
of the Order were served to the Defendant on October 20, 2004. A copy of the
Order of Extension and the Brigadier’s response to the reservations are
attached hereto as part of the description of the facts that constitute the
offenses (marked “D” and “E”, respectively).
7. On April 19, 2004, Knesset Member Avraham Poraz, then Minister of the Interior,
issued, by power of his authority according to Regulation 6 of the State of
Emergency Regulations (Departure Abroad), 1948, an “Order Prohibiting
Departing the Country for Reasons of Security” against the Defendant
(hereinafter: “Order Prohibiting Departing the Country”). The Order
Prohibiting Departing the Country was valid for one year. The full text of
the Order is attached hereto and constitutes part of the facts that constitute
the offenses (marked “F”). The Order Prohibiting Departing the
Country was also brought by the Defendant under the review of the High Court
of Justice (in the framework of said HCJ 5211/04), and the Court also confirmed
the validity of same in the framework of the ruling that was given on July
26, 2004, in the presence of the Defendant.
8. On November 11, 2004, the Defendant was brought before the Magistrates Court
in Petach Tikva, having been arrested, on the suspicion of repeated violations
of the provisions of the Order. His release on bail to seven days of house
arrest was made conditional on self bond of NIS 10,000 and with the stipulation,
that he remain in absolute house arrest, report to the police any time he was
required to do so. In addition, the Court further warned the Defendant once
again, that he was prohibited from maintaining contacts or meeting with the
persons whose characteristics were defined in the Order.
The Violation of the Provisions
9. The Defendant violated the provisions of the Order at the very least 21
times, as set forth in the charge sheet hereinafter, doing so knowingly and
provocatively, even after the High Court of Justice rejected his arguments
against the validity of the Order. The Defendant did so by maintaining contacts
with foreign journalists and giving them information and details that he knew.
In interviews that the Defendant held, he gave journalists information about
his work at the Nuclear Research Center in the Negev (hereinafter: “NRC”),
where he worked more than 18 years previously. In addition, he made contact
with foreign citizens through the internet, by means of sending and receiving
electronic mail, chat, video and audio conversations.
10. On May 22, 2004, the Defendant held an interview with Ms. Yael Lotan, an
Israeli journalist, and Mr. Peter Hounam, a British journalist and subject,
for the British Broadcasting Company (the BBC). In the interview, the Defendant
provided information and details which he knew, according to himself, from
his work at the NRC, concerning the production of plutonium, lithium 6 and
tritium by Israel and the quantities of each of the materials.
11. In the course of the month of July the Defendant met with foreign journalist
Mr. Paul Martin. The Defendant provided in the meeting, details that were known
to him, about an American delegation that visited the reactor in Dimona, in
the upper levels of the structure. The Israelis, according to the Defendant,
erected fake walls, that blocked the delegation’s access to the lower
levels. The Defendant claimed to Mr. Martin, that he had photographed a model
of a “neutron bomb” and estimated, that Israel had developed a “hydrogen
bomb” “because he had heard about those things”. The Defendant’s
statements were publicized in an article dated July 7, 2004 in the Washington
Times newspaper and on the website washingtontimes.com.
12. On August 13, 2004, the Defendant gave an interview to Sonny Miller, director
of the Raprock Peace Center located in Deerfield, MA., in the U.S.A.. In the
interview, the Defendant provided details that he knew, so he claimed, from
his work at the NRC and information concerning the nuclear reactor, such as:
that Israel had 100-200 nuclear bombs already in 1986, that Israel has produced “hydrogen
bombs” and “neutron bombs”, and he also claimed, that the
reactor had released water underground, which he believed was contaminated
with radioactive waste. The interview was publicized on the internet on August
14, 2004 on the site http://www.traprockpeace.org.
13. On August 17, 2004, the Defendant spoke with reporter Amy Goodman, a reporter
for an American broadcast network called Democracy Now and gave her details
concerning his work at the NRC and information about the number of nuclear
bombs possessed by Israel, according to him, and about the production of hydrogen
bombs starting from 1985-1986, and about the production of a neutron bomb – all
according to him.
14. On August 28, 2004, the Defendant spoke with Nick Hoover from the U.S.A.,
a reporter for the internet news website Agonist and gave him information about
his work at the NRC, the materials which he claimed he dealt with manufacturing
and the number of bombs that he estimated were produced every year. The Defendant
claimed, that in 1980 the NRC began producing additional materials, for making
hydrogen and neutron bombs.
15. On September 13, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed by reporter Phillip
Muldray, the interview was broadcast live on the website www.kpfa.org. In the
interview, the Defendant gave details about his work in the control room at
the NRC, and claimed that due to said work, he knew the amount of plutonium
that was produced every day. He further said, that Israel had moved on to produce
Lithium 6 and Tritium for the “hydrogen bombs”.
16. On September 23, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed for the radio program
Arab Voices, which is broadcast from a station located in Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
The program was broadcast live on the website www.kptf.org. In an interview
with reporters, whose identity is not known to the Accuser, except for the
fact that they identified themselves by the names Said and Mark, the Defendant
provided details concerning the production of plutonium, uranium, lithium and
tritium which, according to him, was taking place at the reactor in Dimona.
Moreover, he provided specific details known to him, so he claimed, such as
the production of 40 kilograms of plutonium every year, and that Israel had
the capability to produce 10 nuclear bombs every year. He further stated, that
he had photographed the building in which he had worked and mentioned details
regarding the location and size of the building.
17. The Defendant spoke with Mr. Daiji Sadamori from Japan, who interviewed
him for the Japanese newspaper The Ashai Shimbun. The interview was published
on September 25, 2004. In the interview, the Defendant gave details and information
concerning his work at the NRC. The Defendant said, that he has seen technicians
from South Africa working at the reactor in Dimona, spoke about the cooperation
between South Africa and Israel on the subject of nuclear technology and claimed,
that Israel had 200 “atom bombs”. He further stated, that he had
previously warned of the poor maintenance of the reactor.
18. On or soon before September 29, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed by
reporter Jonathan Lockraft from a local radio station in Adelaide, Australia.
The interview was broadcast and published on the internet website www.abc.net.au.
In the interview, the Defendant declared, that if the restrictions that had
been imposed against him were not lifted and he was not permitted to leave
Israel, he intended to speak with the media at increased levels.
19. On September 29, 2004, the Defendant spoke with Ms. Mimi Rosenberg and
with additional journalists, in the framework of Rosenberg’s program
on radio WBAI in New York, and gave them details concerning the number of nuclear
bombs that Israel possessed, so he claimed, and the cooperation that he claimed
existed with other countries in the building of the NRC.
20. On October 8, 2004, the Defendant spoke with a representative of the Indymedia
communications network from Ireland. The Defendant provided in the conversation
details and information concerning his work at the NRC, the radioactive materials,
the number and types of bombs that he claimed were produced there. The Defendant
said, that he was violating the provisions of the Order and was speaking with
foreigners and that he intended to write a book.
21. On or about October 13, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed on the internet,
by Tony Jones from the program Lateline of the Australian network ABC. The
interview was published on the website www.abc.net.au. The Defendant provided
information and details concerning his work at the NRC such as, the fact that
he claimed having seen the production of 40 kilograms of plutonium every year,
sufficient for producing 10 bombs. The Defendant further claimed, that Israel
had held nuclear tests in cooperation with the Apartheid regime in South Africa
already in 1978.
22. On or about October 18, 2004, the Defendant granted an interview to reporter
Patrick San-Paul for the newspaper La Figaro in France. The article was published
on the newspaper’s website in French. The Defendant provided details
concerning, so he claimed, France having provided Israel with the reactor at
which he had been employed and a plant for separating plutonium from uranium,
located 23 meters underground.
23. On October 24, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed for the television station
BBC1, for David Frost’s morning program. In that interview, the Defendant
claimed, that Israel had 200 “atom bombs” and even “more
powerful” bombs such as “neutron bombs” and “hydrogen
24. On October 31, 2004, the Defendant granted an interview to reporter David
Carlton from the program 60 Minutes, broadcast in Australia. In the interview,
the Defendant provided details concerning the order that prohibited him from
speaking with foreign reporters. The Defendant was asked about an article that
had been published previously, in which he had stated, that Israel was capable
of producing about 10 “bombs” every year, and he said, that he
claimed that was true, based on the quantity of “material” possessed
by the State of Israel, according to him.
25. In the course of the month of October 2004, the Defendant conversed by
means of an internet chat with Ms. Kelly Cotino, a law student at Cambridge,
England. Ms. Cotino mentioned the issue of the restrictions that were imposed
against the Defendant, and noted, that that interview might worsen the Defendant’s
situation. It was agreed between them, that the questions would be sent by
electronic mail and the Defendant would give his responses by means of a telephone
conversation at a later time.
26. In October 2004, the Defendant was sent electronic mail from an internet
user who identified herself as Jennifer Harbury. The Defendant responded to
the mail and attached thereto a file of his resume. The text of the resume
contained many details concerning his work at the NRC, the production of plutonium
and other radioactive materials which, according to him, were produced at the
reactor in Dimona.
27. At different times, in the course of October and November 2004, the Defendant
corresponded by means of the internet with Mr. Rush Rehm, a professor at Standford
University in the U.S.A., whose address is firstname.lastname@example.org. The Defendant
sent the professor his resume, containing many details and information about
the radioactive materials that he claimed were produced at the NRC, and specifics
of his areas of work and responsibility there.
28. On December 12, 2004, the Defendant spoke with journalist Adam Boulton,
who interviewed him for his program, which was broadcast live on the British
Sky News network. The interview opened with the question from the interviewer,
why was the Defendant risking violating the Order by that very conversation
with him, and the Defendant responded, that he was knowingly violating the
restrictions that had been imposed against him, in order to present his position.
Further in the interview, the Defendant addressed nuclear issues.
29. On January 1, 2005, the Defendant spoke with Mr. Lenny Blum from the internet
and radio site Cloak and Dagger in Canada. The Defendant gave the other party
to the conversation information concerning his work at the NRC, provided the
names of the materials which he claimed were produced there, the amount and
types of nuclear bombs that he claimed Israel was producing, and he attributed
his knowledge to the period during which he worked at the NRC.
30. On August 10, 2004, the Defendant was interviewed by the Al-Arabiya television
network. The Defendant told the interviewers about his work at the NRC, and
that in the course of his work at the reactor, he was employed in the production
of plutonium. The Defendant provided details concerning the types of materials
which he claimed were produced at the NRC and the quantities thereof. The Defendant
further claimed in the interview, that the activity of the NRC endangered the
residents of the neighboring Kingdom of Jordan, since activities that could
create environmental harm were conducted when the wind blew towards Jordan.
31. In all of the instances set forth in sections 10 to 30 hereinabove, the
Defendant violated the provisions of the Order, by maintaining contacts and
speaking with people who were not citizens or residents of Israel (hereinafter: “foreign
nationals”) and giving them information, on issues related to his work
at the NRC, in conversations, most of which were intended for mass publication
and some of which, as set forth hereinabove, were even broadcast live.
32. On December 24, 2004, at 21:15, the Defendant attempted to violate the
provisions of the Order, by attempting to depart from the area of Jerusalem
and the territory of the State, his destination being the city of Bethlehem,
in the territory of the Palestinian Council [sic.]. All this, was done without
prior permission and contrary to the provisions of the Order. The Defendant
was arrested at Checkpost 300 on his way in the direction of Bethlehem. By
doing so, the Defendant attempted to violate the provisions of the Restriction
and Monitoring Order and the provisions of the Order Prohibiting Departing
33. By doing so, the Defendant violated provisions that were given in orders
by persons in official positions, authorized for same, and did so 21 times,
and attempted to violate said provisions, as stated, one more time.
II. The Statute Provisions on the Basis of Which the Defendant is Accused:
Violating a Legal Provision – 21 offenses under Section 287 of the Penal
Code, 1977, and Attempting to Violate a Legal Provision – an additional
offense under the same section, with the addition of Sections 25 and 34 of
III. Witnesses for the Prosecution:
1. Superintendent Eyal Peterburg, Israel Police
2. Superintendent Yaron Aram, Israel Police
3. Master-Sergeant Yaron Hazan, Israel Police
4. Commander Ran Shoti, Israel Police
5. First Sergeant Amir Semnip, Israel Police
6. Sergeant-Major Tsion Zehut, Israel Police
7. Sergeant-Major Micky Harush, Israel Police
8. Supreme Court Secretariat Clerk – for submitting the Ruling in HCJ
9. Superintendent Rafi Nuriel, Israel Police
10. Rachel Elmaliah, Israel Police
11. Yuval Reuven, Israel Police
12. Public Employee Certificate – Homeland Security, IDF
13. Attorney Oded Feller, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel – to
be subpoenaed solely for the purpose of submitting a document that he wrote,
on behalf of the Defendant, to the Commander of Homeland Security (Appendix “B” to
the Charge Sheet)
14. Clerk from the Petah Tikva Magistrates Court – to bring the record
of the hearing in Case 0060505/04.
Jerusalem, March 17, 2005.
Senior Assistant I to the Jerusalem District Attorney