Man convicted of bribing former senior Rivlin adviser to advance requests to government ministries

Mazid Hamdan admitted bribery offenses under a plea agreement based on an amended indictment. The Haifa District Court convicted him of paying for help advancing his own interests and those of clients with public authorities. The case matters because it involved access to government decisions, permits, licenses, and applications rather than ordinary public procedures.

Ze’ev Dolinsky was Rivlin’s personal and senior adviser. Hamdan and Dolinsky had known each other for years through their activities in Likud. According to the indictment, Dolinsky used his official title and contacts to approach public officials for Hamdan.

One example involved Hamdan’s plan to build a gas station. Dolinsky contacted a Transportation Ministry official and a planning committee secretary. Hamdan admitted paying Dolinsky at least NIS 6,000 in 2018. Proceedings against other defendants continue, and Hamdan’s admission does not establish their guilt. His case now moves to sentencing.

Bribery is the exchange of money or another benefit for influence over an official decision or action. It becomes especially serious when the requested help concerns government permits, licenses, grants, or applications. Public authorities are expected to decide matters through established rules, not through secret payments.

In this case, Hamdan admitted paying Dolinsky at least NIS 6,000 in 2018. The payment was connected to requests involving public bodies, including planning approvals, entry permits, licensing, medical training, and grants. Dolinsky allegedly used his title and contacts to approach officials for Hamdan.

The criminal issue is not simply that Hamdan wanted help. It is that money was used to obtain influence over public processes. The agreed sentencing request includes six-and-a-half months in custody served through community service, a suspended sentence, and a fine. The court will decide the final sentence and fine.

Hamdan admitted paying Dolinsky at least NIS 6,000 in 2018. The money was provided through two sums of NIS 3,000 that were made available for cash withdrawal. According to the amended indictment, the payment supported assistance with matters in which Hamdan had a financial interest.

The article explicitly groups the requests into at least four broad categories: planning approvals, entry permits, medical training, and government grants. It then gives more specific examples. These included a gas-station plan, permission for foreign citizens to enter Israel, a passport application, a hunting-rifle license, a medical residency, and a grant request.

Because the article lists examples beyond the four categories, it does not provide one exact total for every type of request. The safest count is therefore at least four named categories. A separate count involved an unspecified payment connected to appeals against failed occupational-therapy licensing examinations.

Hamdan tried to advance a wide range of matters through Dolinsky. The article names planning approvals, entry permits, medical training, and government grants. It also describes specific requests involving a hunting-rifle license, an Israeli passport, and a proposed gas station on land Hamdan owned.

Dolinsky allegedly used his official position and contacts to approach officials. He contacted a Transportation Ministry official and a planning committee secretary about the gas-station application. He also sought help with entry for an Abu Dhabi resident and two Jordanian citizens, plus a medical residency and a NIS 250,000 grant for a doctor working in the periphery.

The indictment says the medical residency application was rejected. A separate bribery count concerned appeals against failed Health Ministry licensing examinations in occupational therapy. Hamdan admitted arranging payment to Dolinsky for help with those appeals. The article does not say that every requested outcome succeeded.

A former senior adviser may be able to reach public officials more easily because the title identifies a person who has held a trusted government-connected role. Existing contacts can also make requests more visible or give them faster access than ordinary applications. That does not make every contact improper, but payment for influence can turn access into bribery.

The indictment describes Dolinsky using his official title and contacts for Hamdan. In the gas-station matter, he approached a Transportation Ministry official and a planning committee secretary. He presented the request to the secretary as though it had also been submitted to the President’s Residence, although it was unrelated to that office.

These details show the alleged mechanism clearly: status and relationships were used to carry requests into public institutions. Hamdan admitted paying Dolinsky for assistance with matters involving his financial interests. The court convicted Hamdan, while proceedings against remaining defendants continue.

When people can buy access, public decisions may stop being based on published requirements and the merits of each request. Those without money or political connections can be disadvantaged. Government bodies may also face pressure to prioritize influential applicants, weakening confidence in permits, licenses, grants, and other decisions.

The case illustrates that risk through requests involving planning approvals, entry permits, a passport, a rifle license, medical training, and government funding. Hamdan admitted paying Dolinsky to help with matters in which Hamdan had a financial interest. Dolinsky allegedly approached public officials using his title and contacts.

The article records mixed outcomes, showing that access does not guarantee success. The medical residency application was rejected, while the broader conduct resulted in Hamdan’s conviction. His case proceeds to sentencing. Proceedings against other defendants continue, and Hamdan’s admission does not determine their guilt.

Government officials are expected to help citizens navigate procedures without selling their influence. Legitimate advocacy can involve submitting requests, explaining problems, or contacting the responsible body openly. The boundary is crossed when a payment or private benefit is exchanged for using official status or contacts to influence a decision.

The indictment describes Hamdan seeking assistance with planning, permits, licensing, medical training, and grants. He admitted paying Dolinsky at least NIS 6,000 in 2018 for help with matters in which he had a financial interest. Dolinsky allegedly approached public officials on Hamdan’s behalf and invoked his official position.

The court convicted Hamdan of bribery offenses involving Dolinsky. The agreed sentencing request calls for six-and-a-half months in custody through community service, a suspended sentence, and a fine set by the court. The article does not provide a broader rulebook for officials, but it makes the payment-for-influence distinction central.