Ex-MK Ben-Ari to Argue Insufficient Evidence in Racism Trial

The prosecution's case in the trial of former Member of Knesset Dr. Michael Ben-Ari concluded Sunday, with prosecutor Adv. Roi Reis announcing the presentation of evidence was complete. Following this, Ben-Ari declared his intention to file a "no case to answer" motion, arguing that the prosecution's evidence is insufficient to require him to defend himself against the charges. Ben-Ari faces multiple charges of incitement to racism, stemming from publications and statements made between 2017 and 2023. The indictment alleges he repeatedly characterized Israeli Arabs as a "fifth column" and a "murderous nation," accused them of supporting terrorism, and called for their expulsion.

Judge Gil Gabay has given Ben-Ari one week to submit his arguments in writing, with the prosecution having another week for their response. The decision on the motion will be based solely on these written arguments. The judge noted that substantial evidence is not required to reject a "no case to answer" plea, but Ben-Ari intends to proceed with the motion.

Judge Gabay also decided not to address Ben-Ari's other pending requests at this stage, including one to summon prosecutor Roi Reis as a witness. Ben-Ari's defense claims Reis was significantly involved in directing the investigation, even to the point of formulating questions for those questioned. If the "no case to answer" motion is denied, the defense's case will commence on November 15, potentially including the request to call Reis as a witness. Ben-Ari, representing himself, is expected to testify first.

Ben-Ari plans to argue that his statements were legitimate warnings from a public figure about a flawed worldview that he claims influenced the security, judicial, and governmental systems, a worldview he asserts collapsed after the October 7th attacks. This development follows a recent legal victory for Ben-Ari, where Central District Court Judge Ron Salkin accepted his appeal to obtain internal communications between prosecution and police officials regarding his investigation and indictment. Judge Salkin ruled these materials relevant to Ben-Ari's claim that the indictment was politically motivated, ordering the prosecution to release parts of the correspondence.

In his ruling, Judge Salkin noted explicit references in the internal communications to Ben-Ari's electoral candidacy and the need to expedite the investigation due to it. He also indicated potential improper overlap between the prosecution and the investigating unit, with the prosecution allegedly providing the investigation unit with specific questions to ask. While the prosecution cited the complexity of the charges and required expertise, the judge stated this could justify guidance but not the prosecution's de facto management of the investigation. This ruling is significant for Ben-Ari's defense, as it is the first judicial decision to address the substance of his claims regarding improper motives in his investigation and indictment, though it does not confirm the indictment was indeed filed with improper motives.