⚖️ Cases 1000, 2000, 4000: NIS 1.8B alleged, Benjamin Netanyahu

Benjamin Netanyahu is today's trending search, so here is the paperwork rather than the noise. Israel's attorney general, Avichai Mandelblit, announced on 21 November 2019 that Netanyahu would be charged with fraud and breach of trust in Cases 1000 and 2000, and with bribery, fraud and breach of trust in Case 4000, the state prosecution said in a statement quoted by The Times of Israel. The Guardian reported that it was the first time a sitting Israeli prime minister had been charged with a crime.

Netanyahu answered the same night. The Guardian reported that he called the charges 'false' and 'politically motivated' and described them as an 'attempted coup'. Mandelblit stressed that Netanyahu remained innocent until proven guilty, The Times of Israel reported.

Case 1000: cigars, champagne and a visa

The Times of Israel, quoting the charge sheet, said the indictment accuses Netanyahu of receiving benefits connected to his public positions totaling over NIS 700,000 (some $200,000) from the Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan and the Australian billionaire James Packer. The Guardian reported that the indictment estimated the gifts at about £150,000, and that the charges say Netanyahu helped Milchan extend his US visa. Mandelblit described 'a real supply line' of cigars and champagne, The Times of Israel reported.

The figures moved over time, depending on who was counting. In February 2018, the BBC reported that police alleged gifts worth at least a million shekels ($283,000). In January 2020 the Guardian reported prosecutors suspected $264,000 worth of gifts. The charge is fraud and breach of trust, not bribery, and The Times of Israel reported that Milchan is not to be charged.

"it is allowed to receive gifts from friends"

Netanyahu's defense in Case 1000, as reported by Haaretz on 21 November 2019

Haaretz reported that his lawyers say Milchan gave the gifts because the two are friends, and that Netanyahu was not aware of requests made by his family members.

Case 2000: the newspaper trade that never closed

Haaretz reported that the indictment centers on meetings with Arnon Mozes, publisher of Yedioth Ahronoth, in which they allegedly discussed a deal: Netanyahu would try to limit the circulation of the rival paper Israel Hayom, and Mozes would supply favorable coverage. Netanyahu is charged with fraud and breach of trust; Mozes with bribery, The Times of Israel reported. Mandelblit noted that the deal was never concluded, which is why Netanyahu faces no bribery count here.

Haaretz reported that Netanyahu's lawyers argued his actions were meant to fool Mozes, and that contact between media figures and politicians is commonplace. The Guardian reported that Mozes denies wrongdoing.

Case 4000: the big number

The Times of Israel reported that the Case 4000 indictment says Netanyahu advanced regulatory decisions that benefited Shaul Elovitch, controlling shareholder of the telecom giant Bezeq, in exchange for positive coverage on the Walla news site. According to the indictment, those actions netted Elovitch benefits of some NIS 1.8 billion ($500 million) in 2012-2017. It is the only case with a bribery count, and The Guardian reported the maximum sentence for bribery is up to 10 years in prison, against a maximum of three years for fraud and breach of trust.

Haaretz reported that Netanyahu's attorneys argued favorable coverage does not constitute a bribe, and that all of his decisions as communications minister were approved by the ministry's professional staff. Haaretz also reported that Mandelblit found substantial circumstantial evidence but no evidence of explicit coordination of the deal.

The timeline

What the court record does not yet say

The Guardian reported in January 2020 that the timeline to trial was unclear and could take months or years. The sources read for this piece contain no trial dates, no verdict and no word on a pardon request. Netanyahu's own summary, quoted by the Guardian and the BBC, has stayed constant: there will be nothing, because there is nothing. MissFortune notes that the court has yet to rule on that.