Netanyahu Trial: Judges Reject Defense Bid to Expand Mandelblit Questioning

The Jerusalem District Court has denied a request by the defense team in the Benjamin Netanyahu corruption trial to expand questioning of former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit beyond the scope of his approval for opening investigations against Netanyahu. The defense, led by counsel Amit Haddad, argued for "defense from justice" based on alleged "fundamental failures" in the investigation. They sought to question Mandelblit on investigative actions taken after he authorized the probe, claiming this would help establish their defense.

Haddad contended that asking Mandelblit the "right questions" could lead to the trial's conclusion, asserting that the investigation was marred by numerous illegal actions and excessive zeal from the police and prosecution. He argued that exculpatory evidence was discarded during the editing process, impacting both the coverage and regulatory aspects of the case. Haddad proposed that an indictment could be dismissed based on administrative claims, suggesting that material facts were concealed from the Attorney General, thus tainting his decision to indict.

However, the judges ruled against broadening Mandelblit's testimony, stating that the defense must substantiate their claims of investigative failures and "defense from justice" arguments through other witnesses and evidence. While Judge Bar-Am acknowledged that Mandelblit's testimony might warrant deeper clarification, the court ultimately decided to limit his examination to the initial authorization of the investigations. The defense's attempt to establish factual grounds for their administrative claim by questioning Mandelblit on alleged concealed facts was thus rebuffed.