Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara has declined to appear for a proposed discussion with the judges overseeing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s criminal trial, prosecutors told the Jerusalem District Court on Wednesday, November 11. The judges suggested her attendance last week, seeking dialogue with the official ultimately responsible for the prosecution’s conduct of the case.
Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh said senior prosecutors had authority to represent Baharav-Miara and kept her regularly informed about courtroom developments. Bringing the attorney-general to court while those officials were present would not follow the prosecution service’s working procedures, she said. Tirosh nevertheless reaffirmed that Baharav-Miara and State Attorney Amit Aisman were available for direct discussions aimed at reaching an agreement.
According to Tirosh, prosecutors responded positively to President Isaac Herzog’s initiative to bring the parties into talks, but Netanyahu had not responded. Defense lawyer Amit Hadad argued that the court could require Baharav-Miara to attend regardless of her wishes. He pointed to a recent Supreme Court summons involving the state attorney and said the issues in Netanyahu’s trial were no less important.
The proposed meeting emerged last Thursday when Jacques Chen, counsel for co-defendant Shaul Elovitch, the former controlling shareholder of Bezeq, requested a closed-door discussion with Baharav-Miara. Hadad backed the request. Judge Oded Shaham said the panel had already considered the idea because of her responsibility for the prosecution. When prosecutors challenged the basis for her attendance, presiding Judge Rivka Friedman-Feldman noted the unusual nature of several aspects of the trial.
The panel did not identify the subjects it wanted to discuss. It has previously encouraged prosecutors to reconsider the bribery allegation in Case 4000 and suggested mediation to examine a possible agreement. In June 2023, the judges identified difficulties in proving bribery and proposed that prosecutors consider dropping that charge. They repeated their assessment in June 2026, but prosecutors have retained it.
The exchanges came after testimony from former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit, called by the defense to address authorization of the investigations and whether police acted within the boundaries he approved. Mandelblit acknowledged that some investigative steps had not been presented to him. He maintained, however, that he approved both the investigations and the filing of the indictment.
Netanyahu’s pardon request also remains unresolved. Herzog proposed discussions between the parties before making a decision on that request, separately from the trial panel’s proposed meeting with Baharav-Miara. Meanwhile, coalition negotiations continue following the October 27 election. On Sunday, Herzog assigned Yashar leader Gadi Eisenkot the task of forming a government, adding uncertainty over Netanyahu’s political future to his continuing legal proceedings.
The trial opened in May 2020 and covers three cases. Case 4000 alleges that Netanyahu promoted regulatory benefits for Bezeq in return for favorable reporting by the Walla news website. Case 1000 involves gifts from wealthy benefactors and alleged efforts to further their interests. Case 2000 concerns discussions with publisher Arnon Mozes about favorable coverage in Yediot Aharonot in exchange for measures against rival newspaper Israel Hayom. Netanyahu faces fraud and breach-of-trust charges in each case, along with bribery in Case 4000. He denies wrongdoing.
