Itamar Cohen vs. the US

Attorney General Menachem Mazuz is faced with an unusual situation – a writ of execution issued against US government property in Israel. The order was issued as part of an unlawful dismissal case involving an Israeli who was fired from his position as a security guard at the American Consulate in Jerusalem.

Itamar Cohen, 29, was fired from the consulate three years ago. He served as a security officer for two years before applying for a promotion. After his request was denied, he complained he'd been discriminated against. He also lodged a complaint after vandals sprayed swastikas on a consulate wall and nothing was done to apprehend the perpetrators.

When his complaints went unanswered, he informed his employers he intended to file a complaint with the US State Comptroller. Cohen was fired shortly thereafter. He sued his employers for unlawful termination and was awarded NIS 170,000 (approx. $49,800) in compensation fees.

The consulate decided not to pay Cohen and his fight has resulted in several Labor Court and writ of execution orders threatening American assets in Israel. The Justice Ministry was finally called in to see if the case can be reopened, in an attempt to prevent a diplomatic incident.

Cohen's case against the consulate was heard in July 2005. The consulate ignored numerous court requests to provide a statement of defense and in April 2006 – once all the continuances given to the consulate had expired – the court ruled in favor of Cohen.

'Consulate cannot be sued'

The verdict was sent to the Foreign Ministry and from there on to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, but the latter declined to sign for it. After five months – and faced with the consulate's refusal to pay damages – Cohen filed for a writ of execution. His lawyer, Guy Ofir, then filed for a confiscation of assets order, but it was never carried out. The American Embassy continued to refuse to accept any paperwork.

In May 2007, Mazuz first got word of the case and the Attorney General's Office appealed the court to suspend the writ in order to allow Mazuz to study the case – and was granted a continuance. Eight months have since passed and the case is still pending.

"No one has ever faced an eight-month delay in a writ of execution case," Ofir told Ynet. "If my client was the one owing money to the state, the case would have been settled a long time ago."

The embassy claimed that the court did not allow in the mandatory 60 days to rebut the verdict, ordering it to act within 30 days, instead; and in any case, said the embassy, the Jerusalem Consulate is not a legal entity per se and therefore cannot be sued in an Israeli court.

In another hearing held in the matter two weeks ago, the State asked for yet another continuance. Head of the Execution Administration, Registrar Varda Schwartz granted the motion, noting that she was "utterly uncomfortable with the US authorities' conduct in the matter, nor have I been convinced that the Israeli authorities have done enough on behalf of the plaintiff."

The Justice Ministry stated that "the verdict in question was given the fact the ruling was given in absentia and the American embassy's representatives – claiming that the judicial process was as fault – did not appear before the court.

"The Justice Ministry is conferring with the appropriate American authorities in order to overcome the procedural difficulties in the case and have it resolved. Attorney General Menachem Mazuz has not been made privy to the details yet and therefore has made any decisions in the matter."

The Foreign Ministry said that as the matter falls under the jurisdiction of the Justice Ministry, it would stand by the latter's position.

The American Embassy said in response that the case was being handled by the State Department's legal counsel.

The case is to be heard again this coming Friday.