Yonah Jeremy
The ins and outs of the probe that could bring down Netanyahu
Bob dissects the war over Case 4000
When history looks back on the end of the era of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Case 4000 – referred to as the “Bezeq-Walla Affair” – will likely be seen as what essentially brought him down.
After years of The Jerusalem Post reporting from top sources on both the prosecution and defense sides of the Netanyahu corruption probes, the tipping point is clearly Case 4000.
With regards to Case 1000 (“the Illegal Gifts Affair”), Case 2000 (“the Yediot Aharonot-Israel Hayom Affair”) and Case 3000 (“the Submarine Affair”), the Post had reported that Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit had misgivings when they stood without Case 4000.
Until Case 4000 came around, which led former top Netanyahu aides Shlomo Filber and Nir Hefetz to turn against their ex-boss and becoming state’s witnesses, Mandelblit viewed each case as missing something and being too highly questionable to lead to a toppling of the government.
But with the arrival of Case 4000, Hefetz provided crucial details that likely moved Mandelblit toward an indictment in Case 1000 and may have also moved him toward and indictment in Case 2000 – though the picture there is still less clear and there appears to be internal feuding within the prosecution.
Case 3000 engulfed many top Netanyahu aides, but to date, the prime minister has avoided being considered a suspect.
But with Case 4000, the Post reported for the first time in June that Mandelblit viewed as a bullet that Netanyahu finally could not dodge and as involving such substantial bribery that it could warrant toppling a government.
The Post also reported at the time that Mandelblit might seek a deal with Netanyahu to resign or decline to run for reelection as part of a deal to close the cases and let him retire with dignity.
Since then there have been hints that at least some of Netanyahu’s lawyers might be in favor of such a deal, which may explain why Netanyahu wanted to push off elections that would bring his expiration date much closer.
Because of Case 4000’s importance regarding his legal fate and because the police and the prosecution are both nearing a range of decisions, the war over the case’s presentation went into overdrive this week. Reports on Channel 10 on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday night led Netanyahu to issue his most comprehensive narrative to date, which appears to be the outlines of a full trial defense plan.
THERE ARE two premises to Case 4000 against Netanyahu.
The first premise is that Netanyahu fired Communications Ministry director-general Avi Berger and hired his loyalist and ex-campaign manager Filber in order to ensure a government policy improperly favored Bezeq owner Shaul Elovitch.
The second premise is that in exchange for the positive treatment to Bezeq, Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, directed Bezeq’s online news site Walla to give him favorable coverage. This was arranged through Elovitch, his wife, Hefetz, and some of Elovitch’s top Walla employees.
If true, this would constitute bribery as Netanyahu worked to set government policies that would increase monetary profits for Elovitch in exchange for positive media coverage.
Netanyahu’s statement this week attacked the heart of this theory.
It said that the favorable government policy that Filber approved as head of the Communications Ministry – the approval of a merger between Bezeq and Yes, which is another company that Elovitch had ownership rights in – was approved by apolitical experts. These experts included a senior official at the Antitrust Authority and the legal adviser to the Communications Ministry.
If these apolitical officials approved the merger, even if the merger did end up leading to a windfall of between NIS 680 million to NIS 1 billion for Elovitch (depending on measuring direct versus indirect profit), sources close to Netanyahu ask: How could