Netanyahu Trial Judges Summon Attorney General, Sparking Controversy

The judges presiding over Benjamin Netanyahu's criminal trial have summoned Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara to appear before them, a move described as a "new peak" and a potential grounds for their disqualification. The judges, Rivka Friedman-Feldman, Moshe Bar-Am, and Oded Shaham, initially invited the Attorney General to discuss a potential plea deal that could end the trial, following a request from Netanyahu's defense team. However, after the prosecution, representing Baharav-Miara, declined the invitation, the judges escalated it to a mandatory summons for Wednesday.

The article argues that the judges have exceeded their authority by forcing the Attorney General's appearance, asserting that the prosecution represents the State of Israel and the decision on who represents it rests with the Attorney General's office, not the court. The judges' stated aim is to facilitate a direct dialogue with the "decision-making authority" to assess the prosecution's legal standing and allow the Attorney General to make an informed decision. The prosecution, through lawyer Yehudit Tirosh, stated that the Attorney General's personal appearance would be an "incorrect process" and reiterated that their office remains open to dialogue.

Furthermore, the judges' consideration of holding the session in closed doors is also criticized as an overreach, as Israeli law permits this only under specific circumstances related to protecting sensitive information or privacy, not simply to exclude the press. The article suggests the judges are attempting to avoid writing a verdict, possibly by forcing a resolution, and are deviating from standard legal procedures. The prosecution has indicated that while the Attorney General may appear out of respect for the court, they maintain that the decision on who represents the state in court lies with their office.