Netanyahu Trial: Defense Presses Mandelblit Over Signature on Indictment

Former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit told the Jerusalem District Court on Tuesday that he had authorized the indictment against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, rejecting a defense claim that his signature may never have appeared on the document actually filed with the court.

Defense lawyer Amit Hadad argued that the signature on the indictment had been copied from an earlier document submitted to the Knesset speaker, which the defense described as a draft. Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh pushed back, saying the earlier document was the indictment itself and that transferring a signature between documents was standard practice.

"Clearly, the indictment was filed with my approval," Mandelblit said during the hearing.

Mandelblit, who authorized the investigations into Netanyahu and later decided to bring charges, was called as a defense witness to explain what he approved and whether investigators stayed within the limits he set. Under Basic Law: The Government, opening a criminal investigation into a sitting prime minister requires the attorney-general's consent, and an indictment against the prime minister must be filed by the attorney-general in the Jerusalem District Court. The current dispute centers on how Mandelblit's approval was recorded, though he maintained the decision to prosecute was his.

Hadad displayed the two signatures side by side, highlighting identical details, including a smudge in one of the letters, as evidence the court filing bore a copied signature. Mandelblit acknowledged the signatures looked alike but said repeatedly that he remembered signing the indictment. He also disputed Hadad's account of the earlier document, saying he would not have signed a draft.

Tirosh told the court that the document sent to the Knesset speaker was the indictment Mandelblit had signed, with a witness list added afterward at the Knesset's request. She accused Hadad of misleading the witness by presenting it as a draft and said the judges would rule on the legal arguments. Mandelblit explained that submitting the indictment to the Knesset speaker was part of the process that allowed Netanyahu to seek parliamentary immunity.

Earlier in the session, Hadad asked for time to review additional material on the investigation approvals, which he said prosecutors had sent at 10 p.m. on Monday. Prosecutor Alon Gildin agreed that giving the defense time to prepare was reasonable, and a closed-door discussion was held before Mandelblit's testimony began. Hadad has said he intends to argue that the handling of the case justifies canceling the indictment on grounds of unfairness.

Last Wednesday, the judges ruled 2-1 against expanding Mandelblit's questioning beyond the investigation approvals. Judge Moshe Bar-Am dissented, warning that limiting the testimony could leave gaps in evidence relevant to the defense's allegations of investigative misconduct, allegations that can still be pursued through other witnesses and evidence.

The signature dispute followed separate questioning on Monday about Mandelblit's signature on the amended indictment. He said he had approved that version but did not remember whether he had physically signed it. Monday's hearing also examined whether police questioning about Netanyahu's broader relationship with Israel Hayom went beyond the authorization Mandelblit gave in Case 2000, which involves recorded discussions with Yediot Aharonot publisher Arnon Mozes about favorable coverage in exchange for steps to curb a rival newspaper.

Netanyahu faces fraud and breach-of-trust charges in all three cases, as well as bribery in Case 4000, which concerns alleged regulatory benefits for Bezeq in exchange for intervention in Walla's coverage. He denies wrongdoing. Hadad had said he expected to complete his questioning of Mandelblit on Tuesday, with Mozes's lawyer expected to question him next, followed by prosecutors, whose questioning the court has limited to re-examination rather than full cross-examination.