Netanyahu Trial: Ex-AG Mandelblit Testifies on Investigation Scope
Translated & summarized from Behadrei Haredim by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, with defense attorney Amit Haddad questioning the scope of police investigations. Haddad presented evidence suggesting investigators sought broad information on Netanyahu from a potential state's witness, which Mandelblit denied approving. Mandelblit stated his approvals were for defined subjects, not a "fishing expedition." He also discussed the procedures for investigating public officials, differentiating preliminary checks from full criminal probes.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former AG Mandelblit testified in Netanyahu's trial regarding investigation scope approvals.
- Defense claims police sought broad information from a potential state's witness.
- Mandelblit denied approving a wide-ranging "fishing expedition" against Netanyahu.
- The defense argued police exceeded the scope of approved investigations.
- Mandelblit discussed procedures for preliminary checks on public officials.
During the ongoing trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Jerusalem District Court, former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified on Thursday, his fifth day on the stand. Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, focused his questioning on the scope of approvals granted to police for investigating the Prime Minister.
A central point of contention was a conversation between former head of the National Fraud Unit, Koresh Bernor, and Ari Harow, Netanyahu's former chief of staff, during negotiations for Harow to become a state's witness. Haddad presented statements attributed to Bernor, suggesting he asked Harow to detail any alleged wrongdoing by Netanyahu over a ten-year period, linking the information to the possibility of a plea deal. Bernor was quoted as saying, "I want to know what you're giving, what wrongdoings. It's like a market. You give, I hold. What's the merchandise?"
Haddad questioned Mandelblit, asking if he was aware that police were seeking broad information on Netanyahu beyond the approved investigation topics, likening it to a "fishing expedition." Mandelblit denied this, stating that from his perspective, the investigation should have been focused on specific issues. He explained that in negotiations with a state's witness, it's reasonable for investigators to seek information related to Case 1000, and that the questions to Harow might have pertained to those matters. However, when pressed by Judge Oded Shaham if this was what he had approved, Mandelblit replied, "No. It was a defined subject."
Mandelblit clarified that he did not grant sweeping approval for investigating every possible matter concerning the Prime Minister. The defense argued this indicated police exceeded the scope of their approvals. Mandelblit, however, did not confirm the "fishing expedition" claim, maintaining his approval was limited to specific subjects.
The former Attorney General also addressed the distinction between preliminary checks and full criminal investigations, particularly concerning public officials. He stated that preliminary checks are not routinely opened against ordinary citizens but are used when there's concern about false accusations or when dealing with elected officials, especially a prime minister. Mandelblit asserted that even preliminary checks require his approval as they fall under the scope of an investigation. He acknowledged that upon taking office, he instructed checks on suspicions presented to him, including matters related to Likud primaries and the "Bibi Tours" affair, even if some information initially seemed trivial.
Mentioned
