Ex-AG Mandelblit Testifies Sixth Time in Netanyahu Trial

Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit returned to the stand for his sixth day of testimony in the corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit, who made the decision to indict Netanyahu, is being cross-examined by Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad. Over five previous sessions, significant details have emerged regarding the conduct of the police and prosecution in the "Files of the Alphas" cases. Mandelblit acknowledged that serious investigative actions were taken without his explicit approval and admitted that Netanyahu was not explicitly warned about bribery charges in Case 4000. He also stated he requested the police cease contact with journalist Ben Caspit, citing concerns the journalist was directing investigators. Additionally, Mandelblit addressed issues concerning redacted documents in the investigation materials and a conflict of interest that was not reported.

During his testimony, Mandelblit conceded he could not recall if he had explicitly authorized an investigation into Netanyahu for bribery in Case 4000, though he confirmed an investigation with a warning was permitted. Haddad presented documents showing the warning issued to Netanyahu in March 2018, which detailed suspicions of receiving benefits from businessman Shaul Elovitch but did not explicitly mention bribery. Mandelblit initially confirmed Netanyahu was warned but not specifically of bribery, later correcting himself after a break, stating, "I made a mistake." He explained that the warning was intentionally broad to allow for discretion between bribery and breach of trust, agreeing it was more suited to the latter. Haddad argued this was a substantial procedural flaw, as investigators must clearly state the alleged offenses.

Mandelblit also testified about the police's connection with journalist Ben Caspit, which predated the initial approval for examining suspicions in Case 1000. Haddad presented detailed testimony from Caspit in April 2016, two months before the June 2016 approval. Mandelblit stated that a police officer should not use a journalist as an extended arm for investigation and confirmed he asked the police to stop their contact with Caspit due to concerns the journalist was directing police activities. "I had a feeling that instead of the police investigating, he was operating the police. It was an uncomfortable feeling," Mandelblit testified.

The defense also raised the issue of Caspit's sources, alleging that drivers within the Prime Minister's detail provided the journalist with information about Netanyahu's movements, despite their obligation to maintain confidentiality. Mandelblit stated he learned of this later and was unsure when the details became clear, initially saying he took no action but later clarifying he investigated after being informed. Haddad presented this as part of the defense's claim of unequal enforcement.

Mandelblit also commented on his own media interactions, acknowledging a pre-arranged meeting with journalist Dana Weiss, where he provided background information. He defended this as a legitimate part of spokesperson work, distinct from the alleged quid pro quo in Case 4000 involving media coverage for regulatory benefits. He also addressed the amended indictment in Case 4000, stating he reviewed the draft and the presented events but did not read every single piece of testimony, and was unaware that Netanyahu was not questioned about approximately 95% of the coverage events included in the appendix.

Further testimony revealed Mandelblit's admission that some investigative actions were carried out without his knowledge, including serious ones. He mentioned revoking one action that "infuriated" him, specifically the placement of an eavesdropping device near an associate of Netanyahu, Natan Achel, in Case 2000. Mandelblit demanded the operation cease unless Achel was personally linked to the investigated offenses, stating it was unacceptable to listen in on the Prime Minister's family without cause.

He also testified about suspicions that elements within the prosecution and police were leaking information to the media to pressure him into advancing Netanyahu's investigations, though he lacked concrete evidence. Mandelblit maintained he did not succumb to pressure and made decisions based on the law and evidence. Regarding the submarine affair (Case 3000), Mandelblit stated he did not identify any basis for suspicion against Netanyahu, which is why no investigation was opened against him in that case.

Finally, Mandelblit addressed the investigative "exercise" conducted on Nir Hefetz, who became a state witness in Case 4000. Mandelblit acknowledged that improper actions occurred during this process, stating, "Certainly improper things were done regarding state witnesses," and calling the specific incident "improper and incorrect." He explained that a discussion was held, and the decision was made to examine the investigators' conduct through documents only to avoid prejudicing the legal proceedings, prioritizing the proper management of the case over opening an investigation against the involved parties.