Judge Questions Former AG Mandelblit on Ari Harow Detention
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Police testimonies suggested Mandelblit had pre-approved the detention, though he stated he didn't recall this, believing it was only for questioning. Judge Moshe Bar-Am intervened, asking how detention was permissible. The defense argued the detention lacked legal basis, while Mandelblit's claims of not remembering details created discrepancies in the investigation's narrative.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former AG Mandelblit questioned over pre-approving Ari Harow's 2016 airport detention.
- Judge Moshe Bar-Am asked Mandelblit "How is it possible to detain?"
- Mandelblit stated he did not recall approving the detention, only questioning.
- Defense presented police testimony suggesting explicit approval for detention.
- Mandelblit's memory lapses create discrepancies in Netanyahu investigation narratives.
Harow was then designated to be questioned without caution. Mandelblit stated he did not recall approving such a detention, suggesting it might have been for the purpose of bringing him in for questioning only. This prompted Judge Moshe Bar-Am to intervene, asking, "How is it possible to detain?"
The defense, represented by lawyer Amit Haddad, presented excerpts from police officer Koresh Bernor's testimony. Bernor stated in a closed meeting with the Attorney General that Mandelblit had unequivocally approved detaining Harow at the airport. Haddad directly asked Mandelblit if he had approved the detention, to which Mandelblit responded with reservations, "It could be, maybe he was abroad and I said to question him."
Haddad emphasized the legal distinction between an administrative measure and a criminal detention, arguing that if there was no suspicion of criminal activity justifying a cautioned investigation at that time, the legal basis for detaining Harow at the airport needed serious examination. Further testimony from Bernor indicated that a meeting protocol from July 13th should have included explicit approval from the Attorney General to detain Harow immediately upon landing.
Mandelblit reiterated his lack of memory regarding a specific order for detention, suggesting his intention was only to bring Harow in for questioning. Judge Bar-Am then posed the critical question, "How is it possible to detain?" Mandelblit replied that he had not focused on the specific issue of detention at the time and had not delved into such technical details. Haddad also presented testimony about the extreme detail of the plan for Harow's questioning, including specific questions and topics, which Mandelblit also stated he did not recall.
The defense argues that the high level of detail in the approved plans indicates the Attorney General's tight control over investigative actions. However, Mandelblit's repeated claims of not remembering the specifics of the detention or the detailed questioning plan are being used by police investigators to argue they operated within their discretionary powers. This creates discrepancies in the narratives surrounding the early stages of the Netanyahu investigations, highlighting a clash between enforcement powers and fundamental rights during pre-investigation phases.
Mentioned
