Police have opened a preliminary review into revelations involving the Transportation Ministry’s aviation security system, one week after the attempted hijacking of flydubai flight FZ1073.
Maariv has learned that Lahav 433 has begun examining the details of the case, including contracts and conduct within the Transportation Ministry.
Police are examining the conduct of two senior officials in the ministry’s aviation security system: Avri Cohen, head of the Emergency, Security, Information and Cyber Division, and Dvir Rubinstein, director of the Aviation Security Operations Center.
In Rubinstein’s case, police are examining a suspected conflict of interest related to private work he did for foreign airlines, including flydubai, while serving in his government role. In Cohen’s case, authorities are examining his additional work as a “reserve security officer,” after it emerged that he had not received approval from the Civil Service Commission.
At this stage, the matter remains a police review only. No reports indicate that either man has been questioned under caution, and no determination has been made that either committed an offense.
Two different issues under investigation; Cohen’s case may be civil, not criminal
The issues under review also differ in nature. In Rubinstein’s case, the focus is on a possible conflict of interest. In Cohen’s case, the matter could ultimately prove to be disciplinary rather than criminal.
Rubinstein is not a civil servant, but provides services to the Transportation Ministry through an outsourced position. As director of the Aviation Security Operations Center, he oversees and approves security for foreign airlines and flights entering Israel.
According to reports, Rubinstein also privately provided consulting and training services to foreign airlines, including flydubai and Emirates, while working for the ministry. He also received payment from flydubai.
The review is expected to examine whether a conflict of interest existed between Rubinstein’s work for the state and his private activities. The Transportation Ministry said his outside employment was legally approved and carried out outside the hours he worked for the ministry.
One of the key questions is what the approval granted to Rubinstein covered, and whether those who authorized the additional work knew that his clients included airlines with which he had dealings as part of his official role.
In Cohen’s case, the review centers on additional work he carried out for years. According to reports, since 2018 he had also served as a “reserve security officer” in the Ofek aviation security system while working at the ministry, and received additional payment for that work.
The Transportation Ministry initially said ministry management had approved Cohen's additional work when he entered the position. It later emerged that the Civil Service Commission had neither approved the work nor known about it.
The ministry later clarified that the commission, not the ministry, has the authority to approve additional employment at Cohen’s level, and that no such request had been submitted. According to the ministry, when the current management learned of the additional work several months ago, Cohen was instructed to stop it unless and until a permit was granted.
Ministry responsible for certain security aspects involving flights to Israel
Published documents indicated that the Transportation Ministry’s Security Division is responsible for certain aspects of security involving flights entering Israel. The ministry, however, stressed that it is not an intelligence agency and lacks the tools to conduct intelligence background checks on passengers or crew members.
The police review is still in its early stages and is expected to focus on the additional employment, the approvals granted for it, and whether a conflict of interest arose between private activities and roles in the aviation security system.
As of now, there have been no reports that either man has been questioned under caution, and no determination has been made that an offense was committed.
At this stage, the matter remains a preliminary review and not a criminal investigation. No one connected to the affair is currently being questioned under caution by the National Unit for Fraud Investigations, and no criminal investigation under caution is being conducted into anyone involved.
Police are first seeking to collect the relevant details and examine the full scope of the contracts and conduct involved. If suspicions and evidence of criminal offenses emerge during the review, the matter could develop into a criminal investigation.