Meridor faces rap over Gaydamak fees

Arcadi Gaydamak, who is embroiled in criminal allegations in France and Israel, may find his own lawyers in hot water. Dan Meridor faces disciplinary action by the Israel Bar Association's ethics committee over the fee arrangement he made with Gaydamak. Meridor represented Gaydamak in a pre-trial hearing on charges of alleged money laundering at Bank Hapoalim's Hayarkon branch in Tel Aviv.

Attorney Ilan Shavit, the head of the Haim Zadok and Co. law firm, also face accusations in that he drew up the fee agreement for Meridor, a proposal that was printed on the firm's letterhead.

According to the complaint from watchdog organization Ometz, Meridor broke the law in his fee agreement with Gaydamak. However, there seems to be a question as to whether the agreement in question was even actually accepted by Gaydamak.

The agreement, which was apparently a draft that was not signed, specified that Meridor was to receive an advance of $600,000 and a bonus of $5 million if in the hearing Meridor managed to persuade the court not to press charges against Gaydamak.

Section 84.a. of the Bar Association's bylaws stipulates that a lawyer may not condition or accept a fee for his services in a criminal trial which is contingent upon the outcome of the trial.

Meridor argues that the section should receive a narrow interpretation and that it is reasonable and acceptable to stipulate a legal fee on the outcome of a pre-trial hearing.

Sources near Meridor emphasize that the accepted position in such cases is that everything is permissible as long as it is not expressly forbidden.

Another argument that could weigh in favor of Meridor is that the hearing took place after legislation of the law that prohibits the conditioning of a legal fee on the results of a criminal trial, so that it is not reasonable to assume the legislators' intent to include the results of a hearing. Moreover, Meridor argues, the agreement in question was a first draft that Gaydamak himself had no intention of signing.

Consummation of the second part of the agreement, the bone of contention, is moot in any case: Less than two months ago an indictment was filed against Gaydamak, in which he is accused of money laundering. The aim of the agreement was therefore not achieved in any case.

The decision to act against Meridor was approved by the ethics committee by a vote of seven to five. Those against the decision argued that the offense was not of a disciplinary nature since there has been no ruling on the conditioning of legal fees upon the outcome of a hearing.

Meridor's attorney, Zvi Agmon, said that he believes that the complaint is baseless, both legally and factually. "The purpose of the complaint is to publicly butt heads with attorney Meridor with the aim of undermining his chances of being elected to the Knesset," he added.

Ilan Shavit said that he was also amazed to receive the decision.

"My and Dan Meridor's behavior has been irreproachable. The complaint is factually and legally baseless, as will be shown shortly," he said.