Netanyahu Trial: Key Questions for Former Attorney General Mandelblit

Senior attorney Ilan Bombach, legal counsel for the Likud party, has outlined critical questions that former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit will likely face during his upcoming testimony in the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit, who decided to indict Netanyahu, is expected to be questioned on several key issues, including the initial investigation's opening.

Bombach highlighted that Section 17 of the Basic Law: The Government stipulates that an investigation against a serving prime minister can only be opened with the Attorney General's approval, and questions have arisen regarding whether this approval was obtained in writing. While the prosecution claimed verbal approval was given, Bombach argued that the law necessitates written consent. He further noted that Mandelblit himself had previously expressed reservations about investigating Netanyahu for matters from a decade prior, suggesting the investigation proceeded against his initial stance and potentially violating the law.

Further scrutiny is expected regarding the charges in the 'Gifts Case,' where Bombach questions why prosecutors pursued charges of fraud and breach of trust instead of the more specific 'State Service Law (Gifts)' which carries lesser penalties. He suggests the choice of charges was intended to secure harsher punishments.

Bombach also intends to question Mandelblit about alleged misconduct by law enforcement during the investigation, including illegal wiretapping of witnesses and Netanyahu's associates, and the installation of spyware on their mobile phones. He also plans to ask about alleged undue pressure exerted on state witnesses and what actions Mandelblit took upon learning of these alleged offenses, questioning if Netanyahu's prosecution was prioritized over addressing these serious allegations.

Additionally, Bombach plans to probe Mandelblit about his past remarks concerning former State Attorney Shai Nitzan, where Mandelblit reportedly felt Nitzan had him 'by the throat,' implying pressure to file indictments. Bombach will also question Mandelblit's decision to combine all charges into a single indictment and his initial reluctance to proceed without the bribery charge, which the court later questioned. Bombach believes these testimonies are crucial for the public to understand the circumstances leading to repeated elections, particularly before the upcoming elections.