Mandelblit's Court Testimony Reveals Gaps in Netanyahu Trial Evidence Review

A dramatic discrepancy has emerged between former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's 2019 public statements about the thoroughness of the investigation into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his recent testimony in court. Mandelblit had declared "we left no stone unturned" when announcing the indictment, asserting that the evidence was professionally and deeply examined before he "with a heavy heart but a whole heart" decided to proceed. However, in his recent court testimony, Mandelblit stated he was unaware of certain actions and that not all operations were brought for his separate approval, expecting only the main ones to be presented. He admitted to relying on information presented by police and prosecution officials. This has raised questions about the foundation of the decision to indict, as the public was led to believe in a comprehensive personal review, not one based on general information from investigators. The article questions how such a sensitive investigation's oversight failed to prevent actions that Mandelblit himself later described as improper, emphasizing the need for transparency regarding who supervised the investigation and how decisions were documented. The author argues that while not every minor detail needs the Attorney General's personal approval, significant matters should reach the person bearing responsibility. The testimony revealed stones Mandelblit was unaware were moved, actions he did not approve, and details not brought to his attention, prompting public demand for answers on how the state's power to indict was exercised. The article concludes that just as the accused must be held accountable, so too must those wielding the state's power, ensuring the process leading to justice adheres to the rules of justice itself.