Ex-AG Mandelblit Testifies in Netanyahu Corruption Trial
Translated & summarized from JDN by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified on Sunday in the corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit, who indicted Netanyahu, is being questioned by the defense regarding approvals for investigations into the Prime Minister. The defense claims investigators exceeded the scope of Mandelblit's permissions, while the prosecution asserts all actions were legally sanctioned. The testimony is crucial for the defense's argument of investigative flaws and potential miscarriage of justice.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's corruption trial.
- Mandelblit is being questioned by the defense about his approval of investigations into Netanyahu.
- The defense claims investigators exceeded the scope of Mandelblit's granted permissions.
- The prosecution maintains that all investigations and probes were legally approved.
- The testimony aims to address factual disputes regarding alleged investigative flaws.
- Netanyahu is expected to attend the hearing where Mandelblit is testifying.
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit appeared at the Jerusalem District Court on Sunday to testify in the corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit, who indicted Netanyahu, was called by the defense as a witness and is expected to address questions regarding his approval of investigations and police oversight. Netanyahu is also expected to be present in the courtroom.
The testimony comes nearly seven years after Netanyahu was indicted and a decade after the initial probe began. Defense attorneys Amit Haddad and Noa Milstein aim to clarify with Mandelblit whether investigators acted within the scope of his approvals or exceeded them. The core dispute centers on a Basic Law provision requiring the Attorney General's consent to open a criminal investigation against the Prime Minister. The defense argues this was not met, while the prosecution maintains all investigations were legally approved.
The defense requested seven hearing days for Mandelblit's testimony, scheduled to conclude just five days before the upcoming elections. However, the duration may be shortened based on the court's decisions. Mandelblit had sought to postpone his testimony until November or December, citing his new role as dean at Ono Academic College's new law faculty, but the judges denied this request.
A key issue will be the nature of the approvals granted. The court previously learned that approvals were given orally during meetings and documented in ministry protocols, rather than as separate decision documents, a method criticized by the judges. The defense has presented investigator testimonies suggesting actions went beyond approved limits, citing instances where probes into Yair Netanyahu's use of a hotel apartment and matters concerning Arnon Milchan were allegedly expanded without explicit consent. Another point of contention involves a 2015 meeting between a former Lahav 433 commander and journalist Ben Caspit, which the defense questions as potentially exceeding investigative boundaries before a formal probe began.
Further matters include the 2017 wiretapping of Netanyahu confidant Natan Eshel, approved by a court, and the defense's questioning of Mandelblit's approval for this action. Disagreements have also arisen over the interpretation of meeting protocols from 2016, with the defense claiming they show actions without approval and criticism from Mandelblit, while the prosecution argues the criticism was directed at a different investigative avenue and that the "gifts" investigation was indeed approved.
The testimony is intended to resolve factual disputes regarding alleged investigative flaws and claims of a miscarriage of justice. The final decision to indict Netanyahu was announced on November 21, 2019, and the indictment was filed on January 28, 2020.
Mentioned
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Left 1Centre 7Right 7Haredi 3Arab 1Other 4
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
