Opinion | Netanyahu's Trial: It's Still Coming to a Commission of Inquiry Israel today

The obvious conclusion from another week of embarrassment in the Jerusalem District Court is that a way must be found to stop Netanyahu's trial.

It will sound to many like a call that is too bold, too cheeky, too hasty.

After all, there are judges in Jerusalem, and that is where justice will be published, right?

In general, so many resources and the best minds have been invested in the investigation, in formulating the indictment, in preparing the lawsuit.

Amateur work could not have been done.

And above all, and especially when it comes to a case with political and national implications, it does not make sense that those involved in the craft, and especially Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, the indictment - will jeopardize all their reputation and prestige.

Well, probably that's exactly what they built, who are behind the course indictment.

They will think that "can not be".

A precedent-setting indictment will be filed and then the amendment of the indictments will be announced - and we will say "it happens".

That we hear about puzzling interrogation exercises, and say "impossible."

Read about the witnesses' refreshments and the change of versions between what was said in the interrogation and what was said in court - and we will die "it happens".

Let's see how one witness after another contradicts the version of the lawsuit - and we say "maybe for the next one".

Nir Hefetz on the second day of testimony // Photo: Oren Ben Hakon,

This security, that everything can be done without consequences, is called a conception. And like the charge of bribery in the 4000 case that is crumbling in court, this concept is also crumbling. With excessive self-confidence; Knowing that some media outlets have at their disposal legal writings, which will state their messages in any case; With a political system in which many owe their political lives to the prosecution, and whose fate is related to the outcome of the trial. And thinking that the public might express distrust in the polls, but not leave the social networks.

This conception is collapsing especially this week.

We were told that the "boom" would come when Ilan Yeshua started talking, or in fact when Avi Berger opened his mouth.

So they sent the court writings to prepare us for the bombs that Aviram Elad would land, and here we were assured that with Nir Hefetz it would be different.

He, who was granted immunity from criminal proceedings to testify, will bring down a legal and media hell on Netanyahu.

Reporters and commentators made popcorn, and some government offices had already chilled champagne.

And here it happened again: the witness only illuminates the holes in the indictment, and this time even the judges remark to the prosecution that they do not see evidential value in parts from the testimony of the prosecution witness.

The main witness in the 4000 Ilan Yeshua case, Photo: Oren Ben Hakon

There is a stage where someone has to get up and say that they need to check if there has been a default here.

Legal omission, with catastrophic political and national consequences.

Systemic failure on the part of the legal system, professional failure on the part of those engaged in the craft.

A default means that you have to stop the process at the moment, do a serious home inspection, be willing to admit failures, and if necessary - then also bear responsibility.

And it should happen now, from within, in a controlled way, before the demand for accountability comes from outside, from the public.

And she will come.

The judiciary enjoys public immunity that no professional and bureaucratic elite has enjoyed.

The military and the defense establishment are subject to journalistic and civilian scrutiny, and any failed disaster or operation provokes a justified public prosecution to the Commission of Inquiry and the drawing of personal conclusions.

So too in economics, education and health.

Only one group can walk around feeling protected and locked in a tooth tower, appoint, appoint, duplicate itself, cover for its failures and know that nothing bad will happen to it.

Even public distrust does not bother her: what will be done to her?

The Netanyahu trial, the flagship trial of the system, could change this reality. Is behind the mantle of professionalism and high words dominate foreign interests and motives at worst, and unforgivable amateurism at best. Millions of Israeli citizens, from whom democracy has been robbed, are now seeing what and why they were neutralized by their political power.

Netanyahu's trial may turn out to be a failure of the Yom Kippur of the justice system.

Not only in the sense of systemic, professional and functional failure that led to the damage, but also in the sense of the end of the idol age.

It starts with the networks, with some brave journalists and media people who are willing to go against the institutional line of the lawyers.

This continues in a growing movement of jurists, who muster the courage to express extremely harsh criticism in the face of a system known for its vengeance.

And this is also reflected in the bottom-up organizations for civilian review of the justice system, for example Project 315, which casts question marks on much of the prosecution's evidence.

The Netanyahu trial has set in motion a drift that can no longer be stopped: public distrust of the judicial system will eventually translate into a loud and clear public call, to stop the trial, to examine the conduct and to hold them accountable.

And like the heads of the defense establishment after the Yom Kippur War, here too the heads of the justice system may be held accountable.

Spokesman Mandelblit, Photo: Oren Ben Hakon

So it is better that it comes from them, and from within.

The court itself cannot do so in such a trial unless the defense thinks we have reached a line that justifies a request for acquittal, on the grounds of protection from justice.

It is not recommended to get there.

It is better for the State Attorney's Office itself to lead the move.

Mandelblit has another way to prevent the possibility of a systemic collapse - if he announces consultations for the purpose of clarifying the conduct of the prosecution, providing a public account for it, and re-evaluating the chances of obtaining a conviction on the main and heavy charge: bribery.

He must also include external and independent professional factors in this process of clarification - not the Ifka team, it turns out, or the Vineyards Forum - who will also evaluate the chances of defense on the grounds of protection from justice.

And everything should be done transparently, and out of a statement of one intention: restoring public trust in the system.

If this is not done now from within and voluntarily, public pressure will increase and those concerned may still be required to provide explanations to a commission of inquiry.

Sounds absurd?

There are some generals and generals in Israel who did not believe they would come to this day.

Were we wrong?

Fixed!

If you find an error in the article, we will be happy for you to share it with us and we will correct it