Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the first sitting leader in the country’s history to face trial, appeared in the Tel Aviv District Court to testify on corruption charges. Despite his arguments for postponement, the court rejected his appeals, compelling him to address allegations spanning three separate cases.
During the proceedings, Netanyahu emphasized his commitment to national security, citing urgent responsibilities related to developments in Syria and the “war on seven fronts.” He briefly left the courtroom to address a classified matter after receiving a note marked “national security.”
In his testimony, Netanyahu decried the accusations, calling them “absurd” and “unjust.” He stated: “As far as I remember, I have been waiting for eight years for this moment to tell the truth.”
Netanyahu claimed the charges unfairly targeted his leadership, asserting: “I lead Israel and the state on seven war fronts. I believed, and still believe, I can handle these responsibilities while addressing these allegations.”
The prime minister dismissed claims of personal benefit, stating his work requires sacrifices, including limited time with family.
Prosecutors allege Netanyahu received $283,000 in gifts, including champagne, cigars, and jewelry, from Israeli producer Arnon Milchan and Australian billionaire James Packer in exchange for political favors. Netanyahu denied any impropriety, quipping: “I hate champagne. I can’t drink it.”
Netanyahu is accused of granting $276 million in financial privileges to Shaul Elovitch, owner of telecommunications company Bezeq, in exchange for favorable coverage on the Walla News website. Netanyahu’s attorney, Amit Hadad, argued no formal agreement existed between the parties.
In a third case, Netanyahu allegedly colluded with Arnon Mozes, owner of Yedioth Ahronoth, to support legislation curbing the competitiveness of rival newspaper Israel Hayom. In return, Mozes reportedly promised favorable editorial treatment for Netanyahu.
Netanyahu’s chief lawyer, Amit Hadad, argued the indictments contain “numerous gaps and unusual aspects.” Hadad emphasized there was insufficient evidence of explicit agreements or quid-pro-quo arrangements.
