Netanyahu's Trial - Who is Running Whom?

Dr. Chaim Weizmann

Last week, concluded the direct examination phase in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial, where he is accused of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. When examining how the trial has been conducted so far, it appears as if it's not the judges who are running Netanyahu's trial, but rather Netanyahu is the one managing the judges and his trial. He informs them when sessions will not take place. He even doesn't bother to coordinate with them when sessions will be held, and when the presiding judge dares, in soft language, to ask him to coordinate with them, he responds that the enemies don't take his trial into consideration. When the judges requested to increase the number of hearing days to four per week, his response was "there's no chance in the world," as if it were a By Request program.

Defense attorney Haddad’s questions serve Netanyahu only as a starting point for long election campaign speeches, aimed at mobilizing his supporters and continuing to incite the “base." The judges also don't limit Netanyahu in his speech - neither the duration of his speeches nor the topics he discusses, topics that in many cases have very little to do with the trial's subject matter, if at all. Netanyahu exploited his testimony for long speeches to deepen his sense of victimhood and convince his loyals that law enforcement authorities are conspiring against him and wronging him. For example, it was reported that on February 10 of this year, when his testimony resumed after the surgery he went through, Netanyahu shouted-complaining: "For eight years I have been drugged through this hell. For what? For these nonsense accusations of yours? Aren't you ashamed?"

Despite his complaint, Netanyahu is the one who did everything to delay the beginning of his trial. Since he started testifying, it appears as if Netanyahu and his defense team are operating on two parallel lines with opposing directions. On one hand, he finds every possible excuse (from visiting the Hermon Mountain, through Knesset votes to an unnecessary trip to Hungary and more) to minimize the sessions in which he gives testimony, to cancel them, and to spread them over as much time as possible, while even the sessions that do take place often are shortened, whether because Netanyahu is tired, the lawyer feels unwell, there's a Knesset vote, or any other reason. It seems that despite his false pretense, as if he's being subjected to undue legal hardship, Netanyahu fears the cross-examination by the prosecution. Therefore, his tactic is to drag out the proceedings as much as possible, with as few substantive hearings as possible, postponing the moment when he will have to answer the prosecution's questions under cross-examination.

In order to gauge public opinion regarding the conduct of Netanyahu's trial, the following question was included in a public opinion poll by the Institute for Liberty and Responsibility at Reichman University (conducted by IPanel in April, among 1,005 respondents): "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's trial opened in May 2020 and has continued since then. Do you think the judges in this trial are biased against Netanyahu, in favor of Netanyahu, or are they unbiased (neutral)?"

Despite Netanyahu's control over the trial's management and the judges' noticeable leniency, 37% of all respondents, more than a third, believed the judges are biased against Netanyahu. Only 15% responded that the judges are biased in favor of Netanyahu, while 34% responded that the judges are neutral. Among those who voted in the last elections for one of the parties comprising the current coalition, the percentage believing the judges are biased against Netanyahu jumps sharply to 67%, meaning that over two-thirds of coalition voters believe the judges are biased against Netanyahu.  Fewer than one in five (19%) of them believe the judges are neutral, honest, and impartial.

The strongman of the country behaves as someone constantly testing the limits—pushing and stretching them, stretching and stretching them until someone or something stops him. Except sometimes that moment comes too late, and the damage is already irreversible. As the survey results show, despite the many concessions the panel of judges has made—and continues to make—to Netanyahu, more than two-thirds of coalition supporters no longer believe in the fairness and impartiality, of Israel's judicial system. We are dangerously close to the collapse of our institutions. 

The court has no enforcement tools of its own and relies more than any other brunch of government on public trust—a trust Netanyahu is systematically undermining, driven by personal interests. The judiciary’s feeble response does nothing to preserve this trust, especially when the legal system—under constant attack by the government and its leader—receives no support from the legislative branch. 

Netanyahu indeed declared that he is capable of running the country while standing trial—thus avoiding a suspension due to incapacity—but it now seems that even this balancing act is beyond him, and when it comes down to a choice, he clearly prioritizes managing his own trial. And the country? We can only hope for the best.