TEL AVIV, Israel — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended his actions during his corruption trial on Monday, arguing his need to balance his court testimony with his duties as prime minister. Throughout his testimony in Tel Aviv District Court, Netanyahu faced scrutiny from prosecutors over receiving notes from aides, an action questioned for its transparency.
During the proceedings, the Israeli leader was confronted after a recess, which followed an aide handing him a note. The prosecution expressed concerns about not being privy to the note’s content, which stirred a sharp retort from Netanyahu who insisted that constant consultation over such notes would hinder his ability to testify effectively.
Netanyahu, flanked by his attorney, Amit Haddad, also argued that the pace of the police investigation into his activities was excessively rapid and lacked thorough interrogation. He suggested that the speed compromised the quality of the investigation, pointing out that critical details and responses were not sufficiently sought.
In his defense, Netanyahu criticized what he described as a rushed process and an incomplete gathering of evidence. Haddad echoed these sentiments in court, revealing a statement from an investigator who boasted about the investigation’s quick completion and questioning the integrity of such a hurried inquiry.
Furthermore, Netanyahu refuted claims that he utilized a middleman in dealings with media tycoon Shaul Elovitch for favorable news coverage on the Walla news site. He stated that he had no necessity for an intermediary and could have contacted Elovitch directly, disputing the portrayal of his actions during the critical stages of his political campaign.
The prime minister and his defense pointed to several instances of what they considered negative coverage of Netanyahu and his Likud party on Walla, contradicting allegations of a bribery scheme aimed at securing positive media coverage. Despite the presentation of these articles, Netanyahu maintained none included direct requests from him for beneficial treatment.
The trial’s Monday session also faced interruptions due to rocket alerts in Tel Aviv, although proceedings resumed promptly with encouragement from the judges. However, unforeseen circumstances led Netanyahu’s team to request the cancellation of the following day’s session, a motion accepted by the court after a private note was reviewed by the judges.
This trial is one of three cases against Netanyahu, collectively known as Cases 4000, 2000, and 1000, where he faces various allegations ranging from bribery for favorable news coverage to accepting expensive gifts in a quid pro quo arrangement with businessmen. Each case delves into different aspects of Netanyahu’s interactions with media moguls and influential business figures, with significant implications for his political future.
The unfolding of these cases continues to be a focal point in Israeli politics, reflecting broader concerns about governance, media freedoms, and the intertwining of political power with corporate interests. As the trial progresses, the Israeli public and observers worldwide remain keenly attuned to its developments, which are likely to influence the landscape of Israeli political and media sectors for years to come.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. The information presented may contain inaccuracies, and readers are advised to consult additional sources. Corrections, removal requests, or retractions can be addressed by contacting [email protected].