Court Limits Mandelblit Questions in Netanyahu Trial

A three-judge panel at the Jerusalem District Court voted on Wednesday to limit the scope of questioning directed at former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's corruption trial. The decision, taken by a 2-1 majority, confines the defense to asking about the specific approvals Mandelblit granted for police investigations. This restriction ends a dispute that paused proceedings for roughly two hours as lawyers and judges debated how much of the former official's role could be examined.

Judge Moshe Bar-Am, who dissented from the limiting decision, raised the central conflict regarding the evidentiary record. He asked prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh how the court could ignore Mandelblit's own testimony regarding unlawful investigative actions. Bar-Am warned that blocking further questions might leave a gap in the facts, noting that the door to deeper examination had already opened when Mandelblit took the stand.

The defense, led by lawyer Amit Hadad, had sought to broaden the inquiry to cover police and prosecution conduct between the initial authorization and the final indictment. Hadad argued that material information was withheld from Mandelblit, which may have undermined his decision to file charges. Jacques Chen, representing Shaul Elovitch and his wife Iris, supported this view, stating that investigative failures should have been part of Mandelblit's judgment on the public interest.

Prosecutor Tirosh opposed widening the testimony into internal prosecution decision-making. She argued that alleged gaps in information should be raised with the investigators rather than the former attorney-general. Presiding Judge Rivka Friedman-Feldman noted that Mandelblit had stated he did not personally review some materials, including transcripts, supporting the view that his direct knowledge was limited to the authorization phase.

Mandelblit’s testimony began on October 11, during the final weeks of the national election campaign. The defense originally requested seven hearing dates between October 11 and October 22, with the last five days falling before the October 27 vote. The court rejected his request to delay the testimony until November or December due to his duties as law faculty dean at the Academic College of Ramat Gan. His testimony ran past the planned dates, and Wednesday's hearing occurred the day after the election.

In his testimony, Mandelblit acknowledged that some significant investigative steps were taken without his approval. He stated that he ordered police to halt wiretapping of Natan Eshel once he learned of it and called a tactic used on state witness Nir Hefetz improper. He also conceded that questioning in Case 1000 went beyond the warning given to Netanyahu and that the warning in Case 2000 did not match the allegations. Despite these irregularities, he defended the decision to indict, arguing that procedural issues do not automatically require evidence to be excluded.

The trial, which began in May 2020, covers three cases involving allegations of fraud, breach of trust, and bribery. Netanyahu finished his own testimony in June after 98 hearings. The court is currently hearing other defense witnesses. Hearings moved to a five-day weekly schedule this month to accelerate the remaining evidence. The defense case and closing arguments must still be completed before the court issues a verdict.