Ex-Israeli AG to Testify for Defense in Netanyahu Trial

Former Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit is set to testify as a defense witness in the trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, seven years after the decision was made to indict the premier. Mandelblit, a professor, will appear before the Jerusalem District Court on Sunday, October 11, to provide testimony in Cases 1000, 2000, and 4000. His testimony will focus on the circumstances surrounding the investigations, police actions without his alleged sanction, the interrogation tactics used for state witnesses, and the decisions that led to the indictment.

The defense team, led by lawyers Amit Hadad and Noa Milstein, has requested seven days for Mandelblit's testimony, scheduled for October 11-12 and October 18-22, though the court may shorten this period. Mandelblit's request to postpone his appearance until November due to academic commitments was denied.

A central point of contention is Article 17 of the Basic Law: Government, which states that a criminal investigation against the prime minister cannot commence without the approval of the government's legal advisor, the Attorney General. The defense argues that some investigative actions against Netanyahu were conducted without proper authorization or exceeded the scope of granted permissions. Mandelblit has previously maintained that he legally authorized the investigations, including through oral approvals documented in internal memos, asserting that the law does not mandate written pre-approval.

In Case 1000, the "gifts case," Netanyahu is accused of fraud and breach of trust for allegedly receiving benefits from businessmen Arnon Milchan and James Packer and for actions concerning Milchan. The defense aims to question Mandelblit on what specific actions investigators were permitted to examine and at what stage, and whether actions taken before the scope was expanded were lawful. This is particularly relevant given testimony from retired senior superintendent Tzachi Havkin, who stated that investigators used interrogations in other cases to ask about Netanyahu's ties to Milchan without the necessary AG approval.

Mandelblit's own past statements have also become a focal point. Reports emerged in February detailing his remarks in 2016 suggesting he had not authorized certain investigative actions and might not have initiated proceedings over cigars and champagne received a decade prior. However, the prosecution has presented further details from the same meeting, arguing his critical comments pertained to a different investigative track and that he did, in fact, authorize the continuation of the gift-related probe.

In Case 2000, Netanyahu is accused of fraud and breach of trust related to discussions with Arnon (Noni) Mozes, publisher of Yedioth Ahronoth, concerning media coverage and the rival newspaper Israel Hayom. The defense seeks to establish that interactions between politicians and media owners were common practice and questions why some involved were prosecuted while others were not. Former Knesset member Eitan Cabel testified in early October 2026 that meetings with media owners were standard parliamentary work, and he did not view offers from Israel Hayom representatives as a bribe, despite being questioned as a suspect.