Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial took a dramatic turn this week as he took the witness stand for the first time. For over four hours on Tuesday, Netanyahu, Israel’s first sitting prime minister to face criminal charges, passionately defended his record against allegations of corruption. His testimony comes at a critical juncture, with Israel embroiled in conflict in Gaza and political turmoil at home, illustrating the deep divisions within the country.
Netanyahu’s testimony on December 10th was a significant moment in his trial, which began in 2019. It marked the first time the 75-year-old leader faced questioning in court, where he was grilled about charges of receiving gifts from millionaire friends and seeking regulatory favours in return for favourable news coverage. The Israeli Prime Minister denied any wrongdoing, insisting that these charges were politically motivated and driven by a biased media.
During his testimony, Netanyahu portrayed himself as a steadfast leader who has had to juggle multiple roles. He emphasized his role in Israel’s defense, pointing out that he was leading the country through a series of crises both in the courtroom and in the war room. This balancing act was highlighted by the presence of his military secretary who handed him written messages during the testimony, necessitating a brief recess. Netanyahu’s ability to continue governing while under trial has been a point of contention among Israelis who question his dual role.
Netanyahu’s defense strategy centered on his portrayal of himself as a victim of a leftist media agenda that sought to undermine his hawkish policies. He accused the media of launching a “witch hunt” against him because of his stance on issues such as a two-state solution with Palestine. His rhetoric served not only as a defense but also as a rallying cry to his supporters who view him as a defender of Israel’s security against both regional threats and domestic challenges.
The timing of Netanyahu’s testimony was critical. It came as Israel faced not only a war in Gaza against Hamas but also mounting domestic challenges. The conflict in Gaza, which has lasted over a year, has strained Netanyahu’s government and shifted public focus from his legal battles to the ongoing violence and its human toll. The trial, which resumed after a brief hiatus due to the war, highlighted the tension between Netanyahu’s responsibilities as a prime minister and his legal battles.
Outside the courtroom, the political landscape in Israel remains divided. Netanyahu’s legal troubles have long been a polarizing issue among Israelis, with supporters viewing him as a defender of national security and opponents as someone who has abused power for personal gain. Before the war, his administration’s attempt to overhaul the judiciary and curb the powers of the High Court further exacerbated divisions, leading to mass protests and calls for his resignation.
Netanyahu’s trial has also attracted international attention. The International Criminal Court (ICC) recently issued an arrest warrant for him and his former defense chief Yoav Gallant, along with a Hamas leader, for alleged war crimes during the Gaza conflict. This marked a significant development, as it was the first time an Israeli Prime Minister faced such charges. The ICC’s involvement added a layer of complexity to Netanyahu’s defense, complicating his domestic and international standing.
In the courtroom, Netanyahu’s testimony was also marked by his physical presence and demeanor. Unlike most witnesses who sit during testimony, Netanyahu chose to stand, projecting confidence and authority. His statements were lengthy and detailed, aimed at dispelling doubts about his integrity and leadership. He argued that he was being pursued because of his security policies and the strength he exhibited in resisting pressures from international actors and domestic critics.
The outcome of Netanyahu’s trial remains uncertain. Judges ruled that he must testify three times a week, forcing him to divide his time between court appearances and his duties as Prime Minister. His lawyers argue that the investigation was flawed, suggesting that prosecutors were not interested in uncovering a crime but rather were pursuing a political vendetta. Netanyahu’s defense also pointed to procedural irregularities and bias in the investigation, casting doubt on the credibility of the case against him.
As Netanyahu’s trial continues, it will remain a focal point of Israeli politics, reflecting broader tensions in the country. His testimony was a reminder of the deep divisions among the Israeli public, especially during a time of national crisis. The way he navigates these dual responsibilities could shape not only his political future but also the broader political landscape in Israel. As Netanyahu prepares to resume his testimony, the eyes of the nation and the world will be on him, watching how he juggles the demands of a country at war with his own legal battles.
