Ex-AG Mandelblit's Unusual Statement on Netanyahu Investigation Revealed
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's statement, "If I erred, take me to the High Court of Justice," was revealed during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial. His lawyer, Amit Haddad, presented evidence from a July 2016 meeting where Mandelblit asserted his sole authority over the scope of investigations into Netanyahu. Haddad argued police exceeded these boundaries, focusing on peripheral issues like cigars and champagne despite Mandelblit's reservations. Mandelblit confirmed he required specific approvals for interrogations but denied knowing if his instructions were disregarded.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Former AG Mandelblit stated "If I erred, take me to Bagatz" regarding Netanyahu investigation scope.
- Mandelblit's lawyer presented evidence of his strict control over investigation boundaries in July 2016.
- Defense claims police acted "partisanly" and exceeded Mandelblit's explicit directives.
- Mandelblit expressed reservations about investigating cigars, champagne, and suits.
- Lawyer questioned Mandelblit on whether police ignored his investigation limits.
- Mandelblit denied knowing if his instructions were disregarded by investigators.
During his cross-examination in the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's unusual statement from a July 2016 internal meeting was revealed. Mandelblit stated, "I said what to check. I have the mandate that I decide on the Prime Minister's investigations. If I erred, take me to the High Court of Justice (Bagatz)." This declaration was presented by Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, who argued that police acted in a partisan manner and exceeded the boundaries set by Mandelblit.
Haddad focused on the precise approvals granted to the police for investigating Netanyahu, asserting that investigators expanded their probes into areas not explicitly covered by Mandelblit's directives. The defense lawyer highlighted Mandelblit's insistence that the decision on which matters to investigate remained under his full control, challenging him by saying, "My mandate, not yours. If you don't like it, don't act in a partisan way, take me to Bagatz." Mandelblit confirmed this, responding, "Yes, yes."
The discussion also touched upon Mandelblit's strong reservations, documented in the same meeting, about expanding investigations into topics such as cigars, champagne, and suits. He had reportedly authorized focusing only on three main lines of inquiry, primarily significant suspicions of receiving large gifts from businessmen. Mandelblit expressed disappointment that peripheral issues had come to dominate the investigation, noting, "By the way, the iceberg, and now I see an appendix that has become the main thing."
Haddad presented further exchanges where Mandelblit demanded to receive in advance the names of all individuals investigators wished to summon for questioning, specifically regarding former Netanyahu aide Ari Harow. Mandelblit confirmed he required specific, detailed approval for summoning individuals, but Haddad claimed the police disregarded these instructions. To support this, Haddad pointed to Harow's interrogation on July 18, 2016, just one day after the meeting where boundaries were set, during which Harow was extensively questioned about cigars, champagne, and gifts from businessman Arnon Milchan. When asked if he knew he was being ignored, Mandelblit replied negatively.
