Netanyahu Trial: Ex-AG Says Police Did Not Need Fresh Permission for Every Step

The defense in the Netanyahu trial has secured a key legal argument regarding the scope of police power. Former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit testified that investigators retained standing authority to pursue leads without returning to him for approval on every individual action. This testimony directly challenges the defense's claim that police exceeded their mandate.

Mandelblit, who authorized the original investigations and signed the indictment, clarified the boundaries of his permission. He stated that the subject matter he approved set the limits of the probe. While he emphasized that major developments required further consultation, the core investigative steps fell within the initial green light he provided. This interpretation suggests the police operated within legal bounds when they questioned key figures in the case.

The hearing focused on Case 1000, which involves alleged gifts from businessmen Arnon Milchan and James Packer. Netanyahu's lawyer, Amit Hadad, asked if the police needed new consent to question Hadas Klein, Milchan's assistant, and Yonatan Hasson, Packer's driver. Mandelblit maintained that these actions were covered by his wider permission to examine suspicions that Netanyahu received substantial benefits from these men. He argued that the permission remained in force throughout the inquiry.

Judge Moshe Bar-Am pressed Mandelblit on how officers distinguished between steps covered by the authorization and those requiring additional consent. The former AG answered that the nature of the investigation defined the boundaries. He noted that while he ordered police to stop wiretapping Netanyahu's confidant Natan Eshel once he learned of the operation, that specific instance was deemed sensitive due to the personal nature of the contact. This distinction highlights the varying levels of oversight applied to different investigative tactics.

Netanyahu's trial, which began in May 2020, covers three cases involving alleged dealings with media owners and gifts from businessmen. He faces charges of fraud and breach of trust in all three cases. In Case 4000, he also faces a bribery charge related to alleged regulatory benefits for Bezeq in exchange for intervention in Walla's news coverage. Netanyahu continues to deny any wrongdoing in the proceedings.