Email Casts Doubt on Scope of Netanyahu Investigation Approvals
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Prime Minister Netanyahu's attorney presented an email from June 2016 that allegedly contradicts former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's claims of broad investigation approvals. The email reportedly only authorized obtaining a statement from Ari Harow regarding recordings, not other matters like gifts. Judge Moshe Bar-Am noted the discrepancy between oral claims and written documents, while police investigator Koresh Barnor confirmed a lack of approval to investigate gifts at that time. The defense argues these points suggest initial investigations lacked full formal backing.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- An email from June 2016 allegedly shows limited approval for investigating Netanyahu, contradicting former AG Mandelblit.
- Judge Moshe Bar-Am noted that Mandelblit's claimed broad oral approvals were not reflected in written documents.
- Police investigator Koresh Barnor confirmed no approval existed to investigate gifts from Arnon Milchan on June 26, 2016.
- Netanyahu's attorney argued that initial police actions may have exceeded authorized scope.
- The defense claims written records indicate limited, gradual approvals, not a sweeping mandate.
During the fourth day of cross-examination in the Jerusalem District Court, attorney Amit Haddad, representing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, presented an email from June 26, 2016. Haddad argued that this official correspondence, sent after a sensitive discussion, contradicted former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's claim of having granted broad approval for multiple investigation topics. The email, Haddad contended, specifically authorized only obtaining a statement from former Netanyahu aide Ari Harow regarding recordings, not other matters.
Judge Moshe Bar-Am interjected, noting that the extensive approvals Mandelblit described were not reflected in the written documents. Mandelblit maintained that additional approvals were given orally during discussions, but the judge pointed out that these oral instructions lacked any written manifestation in the presented email. Mandelblit conceded the point but insisted that not all directives from meetings needed to be fully documented in every technical email.
Haddad also presented testimony from police investigator Koresh Barnor, given in April 2024, who confirmed that as of June 26, 2016, the police did not have approval from the Attorney General to investigate gifts from businessman Arnon Milchan, despite his name being on a preliminary review list. This, Haddad argued, supports the defense's claim that police actions exceeded their authorized scope.
The defense highlighted that the official email did not mention any approval to investigate suspicions related to gifts from Milchan or James Packer, nor a general permit for "integrity of conduct" offenses, suggesting a cautious, step-by-step approach rather than broad authorization. The defense asserts that the written records from the time, like the June 2016 email and Barnor's testimony, indicate that the approvals were limited and carefully measured, not a sweeping mandate to investigate matters like gift cases or integrity of conduct offenses.
Haddad further argued that the fact Judge Bar-Am himself pointed out the discrepancy between Mandelblit's oral accounts and the written documents strengthens the defense's position. They contend that key investigative actions in the early stages were conducted without full formal backing from the Attorney General, potentially undermining the validity and administrative order of the investigation's commencement.
Mentioned
