Judge Questions Scope of Netanyahu Investigation Approval
Translated & summarized from Mako by baba
Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified in the Netanyahu trial, where Judge M. Bar-Am questioned the broad scope of his approval for investigations into Prime Minister Netanyahu's affairs, particularly regarding gifts. Mandelblit defended his decisions, stating that while he wouldn't have initiated a probe based solely on cigars and champagne, he authorized investigations into significant benefits. The testimony also covered unauthorized wiretaps of Natan Eshel, which were later canceled.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Judge M. Bar-Am questioned former AG Avichai Mandelblit about the broad scope of Netanyahu investigation approvals.
- Mandelblit stated a general permit for investigating significant benefits from businessmen remained active.
- The discussion included wiretaps of Natan Eshel that Mandelblit had not authorized.
- Mandelblit argued witness testimony transformed the gift investigation into a reasonable suspicion.
- The judge asked if more explicit written authorization was needed for the Prime Minister's affairs.
During his sixth day of testimony in the Netanyahu trial, former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit faced scrutiny from Judge M. Bar-Am regarding the scope of his approval for investigations into Prime Minister Netanyahu. The judge questioned whether the authorization to investigate the "cigar and champagne" affair, a line of inquiry Mandelblit previously stated he would not have initiated, was too broad. Mandelblit responded that a general permit for such matters remained in effect and had not been canceled.
The discussion also touched upon wiretaps of Natan Eshel, which Mandelblit had not authorized for the police. Mandelblit reiterated his prior objection to these wiretaps and confirmed they were canceled upon his discovery. Lawyer Amit Haddad pressed Mandelblit on the approval for investigating the receipt of gifts, with Mandelblit asserting that while he wouldn't have opened a criminal probe solely on cigars and champagne, he had authorized investigations into significant gifts from businessmen. He argued that the testimony of witness Hadas Klein transformed the investigation into a reasonable suspicion justifying a probe.
Judge Bar-Am pressed Mandelblit, asking if the approval was a "sweeping permit to investigate the Prime Minister's affairs." Mandelblit clarified that the authorization was conditional on evidence of substantial benefits received from businessmen. He explained that investigators needed to present him with specific suspicions to deepen the probe, and that status meetings were intended for this purpose. The judge inquired if more explicit, structured written authorization was necessary, suggesting that investigators might misunderstand the scope of a "general permit."
Mandelblit maintained that the investigators understood the need to approach him for approval for significant actions, especially concerning substantial benefits. He stated that the information presented to him at the time did not justify delving into cigars and champagne, but later information about a supply line and the use of code names indicated concealment, which changed his assessment.
Mentioned
