Former AG Mandelblit Testifies, Clashes With Judge Over Netanyahu Investigation

Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit continued his testimony on Sunday in the corruption trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. During the proceedings, Mandelblit and Judge Moshe Baram engaged in a debate regarding the wording of suspicions against Netanyahu in Case 1000. The judges also approved a request from the defense for Mandelblit to testify for five consecutive days next week.

Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Haddad, focused on a wiretap order that the court had approved for listening to Prime Minister's confidant Natan Eshel. Mandelblit stated that he was angered when he discovered the wiretap had proceeded without his prior approval and had demanded its cessation. He explained that such an action, especially concerning a confidant of the Prime Minister, should have been brought to him for approval beforehand, noting it was unusual and not something he had encountered before.

Mandelblit testified that while he did not recall specific political matters arising from the wiretap, investigators were instructed to be cautious about listening to conversations involving political matters if the subject was not under suspicion. He also addressed the scope of approvals for investigations, stating he approves "topics for investigation" rather than specific charges, and that while investigators have discretion, he expects key actions to be brought to his attention.

Judge Baram pressed Mandelblit on the extent of investigative discretion, particularly concerning questioning individuals like Hadas Klein and Yoni Hasson about matters the defense claimed were outside the scope of approved investigations. Mandelblit responded that he did not recall specific details but maintained that the investigation into receiving significant benefits from businessmen was ongoing. He clarified that an explicit suspicion of receiving substantial benefits from businessmen was required to move from a preliminary review to a full investigation.

The judge questioned whether it was permissible to investigate any person or matter regarding gifts, expressing concern that this seemed overly broad when concerning the Prime Minister. Mandelblit explained that a specific suspicion is needed to initiate a review, and investigators must present findings. He further elaborated that while a general authorization exists for such matters, specific approvals are needed for significant actions, and status meetings are held to ensure proper procedure. The testimony also touched upon the wording of Netanyahu's warning when he was questioned in Case 1000, with the defense arguing that the offense was not clearly stated, and Mandelblit explaining his focus was on the factual basis rather than a specific charge, opting for the broader term "integrity of conduct" over bribery.