Proceedings in the criminal trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued Wednesday at the Tel Aviv District Court, as questioning focused on Case 4000 – the Bezeq-Walla affair – and an unusual courtroom clash prompted a judicial warning to defense counsel.
Wednesday marked the 66th day of Netanyahu’s testimony. Due to the prime minister’s scheduled flight to the United States, the hearing was set to conclude by midday, and Netanyahu is not expected to testify next week.
Questioning was led by prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh, who continued to probe the alleged relationship between Netanyahu and Bezeq controlling shareholders Shaul and Iris Elovitch.
Prosecutors allege that while serving as communications minister, Netanyahu advanced regulatory decisions worth hundreds of millions of shekels in favor of Bezeq, in return for unusually positive and interventionist coverage for himself and his family on the Walla news site.
According to the indictment, Netanyahu and members of his family conveyed repeated demands regarding coverage to the Elovitches, who allegedly exerted sustained pressure on then-Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua to comply.
Yeshua, the prosecution claims, instructed editors and journalists to alter headlines, remove negative content, and publish favorable articles to meet those demands. In exchange, Netanyahu is accused of using his authority as a public official to advance matters of interest to Elovitch and to Bezeq.
Charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust
Netanyahu was charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. He has denied any quid pro quo, maintaining that media relations are part of routine political conduct and that regulatory decisions were professional and lawful.
During the Wednesday hearing, Netanyahu was questioned about the role of his former adviser – and state witness – Nir Hefetz. Tirosh challenged Netanyahu’s characterization of Hefetz’s position as marginal, citing defense submissions that described his work as “very, very part-time.” Netanyahu responded that Hefetz dealt primarily with family media matters and was not involved in core governmental work, including security, diplomacy, economics, or communications regulation.
An unusual confrontation erupted during the session between Netanyahu’s defense attorney, Amit Hadad, and presiding Judge Rivka Friedman-Feldman, after the prosecution sought to present excerpts from Hefetz’s police interrogation. When Hadad questioned the relevance of the exhibit number referenced by the court, Friedman-Feldman rebuked him, stating that counsel had no right to object to questions posed by the bench.
The exchange led to a recess. Upon resumption, Friedman-Feldman issued a formal warning, stating that any further interference with the court’s questioning could result in personal costs being imposed. Hadad subsequently apologized to the court.
Earlier in the hearing, Friedman-Feldman asked defense counsel whether additional witnesses had been located to testify during Netanyahu’s upcoming trip abroad, underscoring ongoing scheduling challenges as the trial proceeds.