Netanyahu defense: Police went after PM like Stalin went after opponents

Lawyer Hadad: Prosecution case has collapsed, but we’re proud to present PM testimony

By YONAH JEREMY BOB DECEMBER 10, 2024 10:51 Updated: DECEMBER 10, 2024 10:56

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives in courthouse for his trial, 10 December 2024 (photo credit: Courtesy)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday morning became the first sitting prime minister to testify in his own public corruption trial in a drama that is expected to take over the country’s narrative for the next month, or months, sidelining what the master messenger wants the national story to be.

His defense lawyer, Amit Hadad, told the Jerusalem District Court that this case started five years ago when the prosecution said there was a connection between the three cases.

“This never happened. Nothing which the prosecution mentioned in its opening was proven. Despite the complete collapse in parts of the indictment,” especially with state’s witness Shlomo Filber and “despite the court's suggestion to the prosecution to drop the bribery charge in Case 4000…we are proud to present Netanyahu's truth and narrative,” said Hadad.

Hadad added that the defense have found more and more on holes in the prosecution case to show the court.

He stated that this shows how lost the prosecution and police were and the absence of limits of the police in pressuring witnesses.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives in courthouse for his trial, 10 December 2024 (credit: Courtesy)

Next, Hadad said that former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit filed the indictment against Netanyahu on the day which Netanyahu met with then president Donald Trump in 2020.

He claimed that this showed how political the case was.

In real time, it is worth noting that the prosecution had wanted to file the case months before, but that Netanyahu had delayed this with procedural motions regarding alleged immunity.

The defense opened its case around four-and-a-half years after the prosecution opened its case and seven years after the investigations started, with many observers critical that the court has not moved the case along faster to quickly end the divisive episode in the country's history.

The return of his public corruption trial, after essentially a recess since the summer to give Netanyahu and his lawyers more time to prepare, includes Cases 1000 (Illegal Gifts), 2000 (attempted Media Bribery Yediot Aharonot-Yisrael Hayom), and 4000 (Media Bribery Bezeq-Walla.)

---

---

Following Hadad bringing out Netanyahu's narrative of the cases involved, he will be cross-examined by a variety of different prosecution lawyers.

Although the prosecution has not said yet who will handle cross-examination, the lead lawyer for all cases has been Deputy State Attorney Liat Ben Ari, the lead lawyer for the largest case, Case 4000, has been Yehudit Tirosh, and the lead lawyer for Cases 1000 and 2000 has been Alon Gildin.

Jerusalem District Court President Judge Rivkah Friedman Feldman – who convicted former prime minister Ehud Olmert of corruption around a decade ago – rejected several Netanyahu postponement requests as well as requests form members of his government after granting his initial request to delay from the summer until December 2, due to the war. 

In late November, Friedman Feldman finally gave the prime minister a one-week reprieve bringing the trial up to Tuesday’s main event, but the one week did not really give Netanyahu any relief.

Judges Moshe Baram and Oded Shaham have also presided over the trial along with Friedman-Feldman.

The highlights of the prosecution case from a legal perspective have been the testimony of former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua; the text messages between Yeshua and former Bezeq and Walla owner Shaul Elovitch, a line of former Walla reporters, former top aides to Netanyahu Nir Hefetz, Shlomo Filber, and Ari Harow, former communications ministry officials, such as former director-general Avi Berger, Hadas Klein, and Arnon Milchin; text messages from former Netanyahu aide Zev Rubinstein, former Netanyahu aide and cousin David Shimron, and a variety of police interrogators, most notably Yoav Telem and Eli Asiag.

Some other political highlights in the case – the drama of which has grabbed the country’s attention now and then – even if their impact on the legal outcome was more minor, included testimony from no less than former prime minister Yair Lapid, former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, sitting Justice Minister Yariv Levin, former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, and former Israeli ambassador to the United States Gilad Erdan. Former US secretary of state John Kerry only avoided testifying because the US government refused Israel’s request to involve him in the trial.

Of all of these massive numbers of witnesses and developments, the most important witnesses, legally speaking, have been Hefetz and Filber in Case 4000 – both formerly very close to Netanyahu and both of whom received immunity in exchange for pointing the finger at their former boss of many years; and Hadas Klein in Case 1000 – the key witness regarding alleged illegal gifts to Milchin and tycoon James Packer.

Case 1000

Case 1000 is where everything began, and it may be where Netanyahu is in most danger of a conviction, even if the charges are less sensational.

Netanyahu allegedly received NIS 267,254 ($75,800) in cigars and NIS 184,448 ($52,300) worth of champagne from billionaire Milchan between 2011 and 2016. The original indictment said that Sara Netanyahu had allegedly received NIS 10,900 ($3,100) worth of jewelry from him in the same period, although later allegations pushed that number up to over $45,000. Netanyahu and his family also allegedly received another NIS 229,174 ($65,000) in champagne and cigars from Milchan’s associate, Australian billionaire Packer, between 2014 and 2016.

Klein has been the key witness to connect the dots between these former tycoon allies of Netanyahu and the alleged illegal gifts in Case 1000.

Case 4000

Case 4000 was originally the most threatening case with the most serious charge – bribery – but it has faced lots of problems.In Case 4000, Hefetz assisted the prosecution and remained more solid than expected under cross-examination; while Filber upset the prosecution so much that they declared him a hostile witness, ended his immunity deal, and likely plan to prosecute him in the future.

Hefetz provided the prosecution’s narrative regarding allegations against Netanyahu on the Walla side of the case: that the prime minister used Elovitch and Yeshua to manipulate coverage of him and his political rivals in around 300 instances.

The defense managed to challenge some of the instances and show that Netanyahu’s rivals sometimes also played games manipulating coverage of themselves, but if the court accepts even a majority of the instances, the volume of coverage manipulation by the prime minister would drown out what his rivals have managed to achieve.Filber was supposed to close the circle by providing the prosecution narrative against Netanyahu on the Bezeq side, namely that he allegedly used his powers over communications policies to benefit Bezeq to the tune of hundreds of millions of shekels – or more.

Given that Elovitch owned both Bezeq and Walla, Netanyahu would have been benefiting Elovitch’s right hand so that Elovitch could essentially benefit Netanyahu with his left hand.

Filber was also supposed to testify that shortly after, on June 7, 2015, he was called to a special meeting with the prime minister, during which the scheme was hatched.But Filber ended up calling into doubt the date of the meeting, as well as whether Netanyahu’s instructions to him were merely designed to help Elovitch or were also good policy.If they were also good policy, then much of Case 4000, certainly the most serious and jail-worthy bribery charge, falls apart.

Netanyahu is expected to testify that he was close friends with Milchin and Packer and that any gifts they gave him - no matter how expensive - were in the context of that friendship.

He is also expected to claim that any actions he took in favor of Milchin had nothing to do with the gifts and were the correct policy regarding the issue in question or were rewards for contributions that Milchin made to Israeli national security.

His biggest problem with those claims will be that Klein has testified of instances where both the prime minister and his wife, Sara Netanyahu, made demands to receive gifts, even when their billionaire allies did not seem to want to continue the gift-giving train.

Likewise, Netanyahu will argue in Case 4000 that trying to influence media coverage at Walla to be less biased against oneself is standard for nearly all politicians and that any policy moves made in favor of Bezeq, were the right policies, or that he did not know about all of the actions taken by his subordinates on the issue.

He will have to contend with Hefetz's testimony contradicting his narrative as well as parts of Filber's testimony and others contradicting his narrative.

Case 2000 is the weakest of the cases and is expected to take up less of the time of the prime minister's testimony in court.

The defense case probably will not close before the end of 2025 or even the end of 2026, and the closing arguments and expected appeal will draw the saga out even longer.