Former president Moshe Katsav, whose indictment was filed Thursday in the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court, stands to lose an annual income estimated at NIS 1.1 million and could even go to jail if the judge so rules.

Following Thursday's indictment, the magistrate's court is now due to schedule a hearing, during which Katsav is expected to plead guilty to the watered-down charges contained in the indictment that was part of his plea bargain.

On Wednesday, the prosecution rejected a request by the Movement for Quality Government to postpone filing the indictment until Sunday, when it said it would ask the High Court of Justice to hold a second hearing on the plea bargain before an expanded panel of justices.

The state prosecution has already made clear that it would ask the court to determine in its verdict that the crimes to which Katsav pleaded guilty involved moral turpitude. Should the court accede, Katsav would lose an estimated NIS 1.1m. per year in "extra payments" that he would otherwise receive as a former president. The "extra payments" include the costs of his home in Kiryat Malachi, an office and secretaries, and a car and chauffeur.

The decision to introduce this sanction was made in July by the Knesset Finance Committee. While it applies to all public figures convicted of offenses involving moral turpitude, the committee approved it with Katsav in mind.

The decision will not affect his monthly pension, which is approximately NIS 48,000.

"It is fitting for him to receive his pension, but all other benefits must be immediately removed," said MK Shelly Yacimovich (Labor), who initiated the motion to remove the ex-head of state's benefits.

However, even if moral turpitude is not included in Katsav's conviction, the Knesset Finance Committee said it would still take steps to cancel Katsav's presidential benefits.

MK Haim Oron (Meretz) convened a special meeting of the Knesset Ethics Committee this week, in which he demanded that Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz charge Katsav with acts of moral turpitude.

"If the [former] president demands a new plea bargain due to the moral turpitude charges, then an entirely new indictment must be submitted against Katsav," Oron said.

Finance Committee Chairman MK Stas Meseznikov (Israel Beiteinu) said there was "no doubt" that Katsav's benefits should be revoked, considering the damage that his actions caused to the public image of the presidency.

One of Katsav's lawyers, Zion Amir, said on Thursday the former president would reconsider whether to go ahead with the plea bargain if the state asked the court to declare moral turpitude. On Wednesday, Katsav met with all three of his attorneys - Amir, Avigdor Feldman and Avraham Lavi - to discuss Tuesday's High Court 3-2 decision to reject six petitions to nullify the plea bargain agreement. The lawyers said they had not yet decided what to do.

In her dissenting opinion on Tuesday, Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch expressed concern that the description of Katsav's actions as they appeared in the plea bargain indictment would be considered insufficient to justify branding them with moral turpitude.

"The substantial gap between the gravity of the prima facie evidence in the file and the description of the facts in the indictment agreed upon by the prosecution and the defense could have implications for the determination of whether Katsav's actions involved moral turpitude," she wrote.

According to Beinisch, "Tourism Ministry Aleph" charged that Katsav had raped her twice and perpetrated other indecent acts such as touching her in intimate parts of her body. The plea bargain agreement, on the other hand, "described acts on the lowest rung of sexual misconduct. It did not state that he touched intimate parts of her body, lacked a clear sexual element and did not refer to substantial pressure applied by Katsav.

MK Orit Noked (Labor) said that if the court did not declare that Katsav's crimes involved moral turpitude, the Knesset Finance Committee should convene to consider the matter. However, Meseznikov said the committee could not substitute for the court and cancel a benefit that was legally coming to the former president.

The moral turpitude issue did not arise in the negotiations between the prosecution and defense and was not mentioned in the plea bargain. Mazuz told the High Court in September that when the plea bargain was being negotiated, the question of moral turpitude did not seem important because it would only have been relevant if Katsav were intending to run for public office again. Since then, however, the Finance Committee passed its ruling so that Katsav stood to lose money if his actions were deemed to involve moral turpitude.

"The Finance Committee's decision gives greater advantages to the plea bargain and is another expression of the public rejection of Katsav," Mazuz wrote.

According to the plea bargain, the prosecution and defense will both recommend that Katsav be given a one-year suspended sentence. They also agreed that in discussing Katsav's behavior before the court, they would restrict themselves to the actions carried out by Katsav as described in the indictment.

Under the plea bargain indictment, the crime that Katsav was convicted of regarding Tourism Ministry Aleph was committing an indecent act without consent under pressure. The offense carries a sentence of up to seven years in prison. The judge is not obligated to accept the plea bargain recommendation. He may hand down any sentence he feels is appropriate, within the confines of the law. But while the judge who will preside over the case will obviously know more about Katsav's conduct than what appears in the indictment, he may feel his hands are tied because of the watered-down description before him.

Copyright 1995- 2008 The Jerusalem Post