Netanyahu Lawyer Claims Key Document Was Blacked Out for Five Years

A heated confrontation erupted in Jerusalem's District Court on Tuesday during the third day of testimony from former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit. Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, presented a document from October indicating "no place to open an investigation against the Prime Minister." Haddad argued that this crucial statement was blacked out for five years, demanding to know who ordered its concealment. Prosecutor Judith Tirosh objected, claiming the discussion was protected internal discourse, while Judge Oded Shaham Bar-Am questioned the necessity of identifying the speakers.

Haddad presented the document, which he stated was an internal correspondence, not an official approval as claimed by the prosecution. The document included a note to the Attorney General stating, "See the document written by Eli, Tax and Economic Prosecution," followed by the explicit determination that "there is no place to open an investigation against the Prime Minister and others." Haddad highlighted that the part explicitly ruling out an investigation was blacked out in the documents provided to the defense.

Tirosh objected to Haddad's line of questioning regarding the blacked-out sections, and Mandelblit was removed from the courtroom while arguments were made. Tirosh contended that the prosecution followed court orders and provided all available information, asserting that there was no official written approval and that internal discussions are protected. She cited legal opinions, including those from Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit, defending the confidentiality of internal consultations.

Haddad rejected the prosecution's position, emphasizing that the questions about the blackouts directly concerned documents originating from the Attorney General's office. He argued that investigating the reasons for withholding information, when legally required to be disclosed, is a legitimate right. Haddad also noted that prosecution representatives, including Tirosh and Alon Gildin, had previously testified that the decision on what to black out was made solely in the Attorney General's office, not by the court.

Judge Bar-Am intervened, asking Haddad why knowing the identity of the writer of the internal memo was essential, given that the statement's existence was acknowledged. Haddad responded that the issue was vital because the documents were initially presented as official investigation approvals, but crucial details were hidden, preventing the defense from revealing the truth about the decision-making process. The intense discussion continues to occupy the court regarding the legality and scope of investigation approvals in the "Cases of the Four Hundred."