Ex-AG Mandelblit Confirms Pressure During Netanyahu Investigations
Translated & summarized from Now 14 by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit confirmed under cross-examination that he faced significant pressure during the initial investigations into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His lawyer presented media reports from 2016 alleging Mandelblit was blocking police and prosecution demands. Mandelblit acknowledged the pressure and critical articles but denied they were part of an organized campaign to dictate his decisions.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Former AG Avichai Mandelblit confirmed he faced significant pressure during Netanyahu investigations.
- Mandelblit's lawyer presented media reports from 2016 alleging he blocked investigation expansion.
- Judge Moshe Bar-Am directly questioned Mandelblit, who confirmed pressure with a "Yes."
- Mandelblit acknowledged articles attacked him but denied they dictated his decisions.
- The defense argued publications were a planned campaign to force additional probes.
Former Attorney General Dr. Avichai Mandelblit confirmed on Thursday that he faced significant pressure during the initial stages of the investigations into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit's testimony came during his cross-examination at the Jerusalem District Court.
Mandelblit's lawyer, Amit Haddad, presented media reports from September 2016 that criticized Mandelblit for allegedly blocking police and prosecution demands to expand the investigation against Netanyahu. Haddad argued that these publications and leaks were intended to pressure Mandelblit into approving further lines of inquiry.
Judge Moshe Bar-Am directly asked Mandelblit if he had indeed faced pressure during that sensitive period. Mandelblit responded with a simple "Yes," adding that he had previously addressed the matter in earlier investigation meetings. Haddad emphasized that his aim was to demonstrate the nature and intensity of the public criticism directed at Mandelblit, which portrayed him as obstructing the investigation.
When Haddad presented further reports alleging Mandelblit allowed investigated parties to coordinate testimonies, Mandelblit stated, "I don't remember these articles, but I remember articles that attacked me." He also addressed reports citing his assessment of potential evidence for a ten-year statute of limitations offense, acknowledging it might be implied but not recalling specific details.
Haddad's central argument was that these publications were part of a planned pressure campaign to force Mandelblit to approve additional investigations against Netanyahu. Mandelblit, while acknowledging the pressure and critical articles, rejected the claim that the publications were part of a deliberate, organized effort to dictate his decisions. He reiterated his stance from 2016, emphasizing his mandate to decide on investigations and his willingness to be challenged in the High Court of Justice (Bagatz) if he erred, highlighting his struggle to maintain his discretion amidst public outcry.
Mentioned
