The defense team of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formally requested that former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit testify in the prime minister’s ongoing criminal trial, with proposed testimony scheduled to begin in mid-October, weeks before the country’s national election. The defense submitted the request on Thursday to the Jerusalem District Court, seeking seven days for Mandelblit’s appearance from October 11 to 22, excluding October 13-17. The first date coincides closely with the third anniversary of the October 7 attacks, while the election is set for October 27.
Mandelblit, who authorized the investigations into Netanyahu and subsequently decided to indict him, has not yet testified in the trial. Under Israeli law, the attorney-general’s consent is necessary to initiate a criminal investigation against a sitting prime minister. Mandelblit granted this approval and in 2019 moved to charge Netanyahu in three separate cases, known as Cases 1000, 2000, and 4000, involving allegations ranging from fraud to breach of trust.
The defense intends to focus Mandelblit’s testimony on the scope and timing of his authorization of investigative actions, as well as whether law enforcement officials exceeded the limits set by his consent. The defense has asserted that certain investigative procedures were carried out without proper authorization and has sought to challenge evidence obtained through those means.
Prosecutors have maintained that Mandelblit approved all relevant investigative steps and reject the defense’s claims regarding overreach. These conflicting perspectives have come to light during recent testimony from key figures involved in the probe. For instance, former investigator Shmuel Sharvit testified that a court-authorized wiretap on Netanyahu’s associate, Natan Eshel, was halted within a month due to a lack of Mandelblit’s formal approval. Conversely, former police legal adviser Alon Tsarfati asserted that attorney-general consent is mandatory for opening an investigation but is not required for every subsequent investigative action.
Additional testimony this week included remarks from Eran Kamin, a former senior officer at Lahav 433, Israel’s national crime unit. Kamin described meeting journalist Ben Caspit at a café to verify information concerning alleged gifts to the Netanyahu family. During cross-examination, Netanyahu’s defense challenged the reliability of a purported transcript referencing private investigators and airport surveillance footage, which Kamin contested.
The decision to summon Mandelblit as a witness marks a significant development in a high-profile trial unfolding amid a politically charged environment. His testimony could clarify key disputes over procedural authorizations that are central to the defense’s arguments ahead of the election.