A new page opens Sunday in Israel with the start of the trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, who thus becomes the first head of government in the country’s history to face criminal charges of corruption during his tenure.
After seventeen months of an electoral crisis in which he played his “Political survival”, Netanyahu is expected to go to the Jerusalem district court for a new battle, this time legal, to avoid prison and whitewash his reputation.
Benyamin Netanyahu is a regular at the first. First head of government in the history of Israel born after the creation of the country, more perennial of the Israeli Prime Ministers, more fierce adversary of Iran … But he would have done well without it.
Before him, Ehud Olmert, a former star of Likud, his party, had already been charged with corruption but after having resigned from his mandate as Prime Minister. Olmert had been convicted of receiving bribes before languishing in prison for sixteen months.
Benyamin Netanyahu, 70, accused of having received 700,000 shekels (180,000 €) of cigars, champagne and jewelry from wealthy personalities in exchange for financial or personal favors, seeks to avoid this scenario.
Case ” unprecedented “
Investigators said Netanyahu had also attempted to gain favorable coverage from Israel’s largest paid daily, Yediot Aharonot.
Above all, the courts suspect him of having granted government favors that could have brought in millions of dollars to the owner of the Israeli telecommunications company Bezeq in exchange for favorable media coverage by one of the group’s media, influencing him. Walla site.
Of the three cases for which Benjamin Netanyahu will be tried, it is the latter which is the most explosive but perhaps also the most complex.
“In classic cases of corruption, everything revolves around money […] but this is corruption to obtain favorable press coverage. It’s unprecedented “, notes Amir Fuchs, a researcher at the Democratic Institute of Israel, a research center in Jerusalem.
How to prove media favors? “It’s not just offering favorable coverage (to Netanyahu), saying good things about him […] but give it full editorial control over specific texts and photos “, he adds.
After months of suspense, Attorney General Avichaï Mandelblit charged Mr. Netanyahu in November 2019, which was then considered a “Political death sentence” by its detractors.
But “Bibi”, as the Israelis call it, managed to stay at the head of his party, finishing first in the last legislative elections, to negotiate a power-sharing agreement with his rival Benny Gantz and, thus, to remain Prime Minister.
” Conflict of interest “
Netanyahu’s lawyers had asked that he not have to appear at the opening on Sunday afternoon (12 p.m. GMT) of a trial that could stretch over several months or even years in including possible calls.
But the court has confirmed in recent days that the Prime Minister must be present at the hearing, even if it remains technical, with the program of reading of the indictments. “A person can only be tried for criminal allegations in his presence”, insisted the magistrates.
In Israel, the Prime Minister has no judicial immunity, but, unlike other elected officials and public servants, he does not have to resign or withdraw during his trial.
For Yuval Shany, professor of law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Benjamin Netanyahu will find himself in ” conflict of interest “ because it is both “Head of government and therefore responsible for a large number of decisions that can affect people’s lives” and “Accused in struggle against the government institutions which are pursuing him”.
It would therefore be in the position to lead a government but also to weaken it, hence the question for the population whether its decisions will be taken in the interest of the country or in that of an accused Prime Minister, notes M Shany.
After the first day of his trial, the three judges of the Jerusalem court chosen by the Supreme Court for this unprecedented case may ask the Prime Minister to attend various hearings.
The principal concerned pleads his innocence, denounces a plot hatched by the justice against him but could also, at any time before the verdict, “Negotiate a sentence” with the prosecutor as permitted by Israeli law.
– .
