Netanyahu Trial Stalemate: AG's Refusal to Appear Sparks Criticism

Lawyer Eyal Basarglik has sharply criticized the Attorney General's office for its refusal to appear in court for the ongoing trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The prosecution informed the court that Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is not expected to accept the judges' invitation to appear. Basarglik suggested that elements within the prosecution are interested in prolonging the trial.

Basarglik clarified that the judges had not issued a mandatory summons but had raised the possibility following a comment by Netanyahu's defense attorney, Amit Haddad. The judges indicated they were considering the possibility of summoning the Attorney General. Basarglik stressed the difference between a judicial suggestion and a binding order, stating that if the judges issue a mandatory order, Baharav-Miara would be compelled to attend and answer questions.

He expressed concern that the Attorney General's office's decision not to consider the judges' suggestion raises questions about the prosecution's conduct. Basarglik cited previous difficulties in the trial, including the judges' assessment of challenges in proving the bribery charge in Case 4000, allegations of improper investigation procedures, and irregularities during witness examinations. He noted that the presiding judge had also commented on these issues.

Basarglik also commented on Netanyahu's pardon request and attempts at criminal mediation, describing the request as "half a pardon request" due to the lack of admission of guilt. He criticized the President's office's involvement, stating that while the prosecution and Attorney General's office are usually open to dialogue, they refused to participate in standard criminal mediation for this case, only agreeing to mediation under the President's auspices, despite him not being a criminal mediator.

Despite the prosecution's announcement, Basarglik reiterated that the possibility of the Attorney General's appearance is not entirely off the table. He believes the judges could still issue a mandatory summons. The intention, he explained, was not to interrogate the Attorney General about approvals granted during former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit's tenure, but to allow her to hear the judges' position directly and present her own. Basarglik concluded by lamenting that the situation has become a hostage to an event where someone is taking it in unrelated directions.