Netanyahu trial judges order Attorney General to appear in person on Wednesday
The judges overruled Gali Baharav-Miara's objection and summoned her to a hearing on how the trial will proceed, after urging prosecutors to drop the bribery count in Case 4000.

Benjamin Netanyahu. File photo by Avi Ohayon, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
The judges hearing the criminal trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have ordered Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara to come to court herself for a hearing on Wednesday, overruling her objection, Ynet reported. According to Ynet, the judges told her that her personal presence was needed "to hold a purposeful two-sided dialogue".
The session concerns how the trial will be conducted from here on, according to a report carried on the Telegram channel of journalist Amit Segal, which credited legal reporter Avishai Grinzaig. News.co.il carried the same account with the same attribution, and Ynet's news alerts channel also flagged the order. The summons comes from the same judges who, Ynet noted, had recommended that the prosecution withdraw the bribery charge in the case known as Case 4000.
Who the Attorney General is and why her presence matters
In Israel, the Attorney General heads the state's legal system. The office oversees the State Prosecution, which brings criminal cases in court, and also serves as the government's chief legal adviser. Hebrew-language media often refer to the post by the abbreviation "Yoamashit", the feminine form of the term for legal adviser to the government, which is the word used in all four reports.
Day-to-day courtroom work in a criminal trial is normally carried out by the prosecutors assigned to the case rather than by the Attorney General personally. That is part of what makes a direct order for her to appear notable. The reports say she opposed being summoned, and the judges chose to require her attendance anyway.
Baharav-Miara has held the post through a period of repeated friction with Netanyahu's government over legal and constitutional questions. Her role in the prime minister's own prosecution has been a recurring point of contention in Israeli politics.
Israel's week in five stories, every Friday
Sourced and checked by the Israel.com newsroom, with Shabbat times. Free, one-click unsubscribe.
One list, unsubscribe in a click. See our privacy policy.
The Netanyahu trial and Case 4000
Netanyahu is the first sitting Israeli prime minister to stand trial on criminal charges. The proceedings combine several separate cases, which the Israeli public knows by their police file numbers. He denies all wrongdoing.
Case 4000 is the case in which the bribery charge was filed. It is widely regarded as the most serious part of the indictment, because bribery carries heavier legal weight than the other offences he faces, which include fraud and breach of trust.

File photo
Next story Elections
Netanyahu to brief Eisenkot at 5 p.m. after appeal to attorney general
According to Ynet, the judges had recommended that the prosecution step back from the bribery clause in that case. A recommendation of this kind from the bench is not a ruling: the decision whether to amend an indictment rests with the prosecution, which answers to the Attorney General. That link helps explain why the judges want to speak with her directly rather than only with the prosecutors in the courtroom.
What the hearing is about
The reports describe Wednesday's session as a hearing on the continued management of the trial. Ynet's account of the judges' reasoning, that they want a dialogue running in both directions, suggests the court is seeking an exchange with the head of the prosecution over the course of the case. None of the reports describes the specific agenda in more detail.
All four reports appeared within a few minutes of one another and give closely matching accounts of the core facts: an order from the judges, an objection from the Attorney General, and a hearing set for Wednesday. Ynet's article is the only one of the four that ties the order to the earlier recommendation on the bribery count and quotes the judges' stated reason.
What the reports do not say
- None of the reports explains the grounds on which the Attorney General objected to appearing, and no response from her office has been reported.
- The reports do not say whether the prosecution has responded to the judges' recommendation on the bribery charge in Case 4000, or what its position is.
- There is no reported reaction from Netanyahu or his defence team to the order.
- The reports do not say whether the Attorney General will comply, or what would follow if she does not.
Read next
All courts & crime →
File photo
Elections
Netanyahu's office calls Eisenkot's public security letter irresponsible

Illustration
Courts & Crime
Attorney General declines judges' invitation, says open to plea deal talks

Illustration
Elections
Attorney General says no evidence foreign interference could alter Israel's election

Illustration
Security
Attorney General tells Shin Bet to show evidence before Arab MKs are questioned
Sources and further reading
Every link below was opened and checked when this page was written. Official statements are marked as such: they are the subject's own account, not an independent one.
- Reportingyediothynet.co.ilYnet
- Reportingyediotht.meYnet alerts
- Reportingamitsegalt.meAmit Segal
- Reportingnewssilt.meNews.co.il
How we checked this
The order and the Attorney General's objection were reported by Ynet, News.co.il and Amit Segal's Telegram channel, the latter two crediting reporter Avishai Grinzaig. The link to the Case 4000 bribery recommendation and the judges' quoted reasoning come from Ynet alone.
Our sourcing and corrections policy →The week from Israel, in one email
The stories that mattered, sourced and checked by the Israel.com newsroom. Free, weekly, one-click unsubscribe.
One list, unsubscribe in a click. See our privacy policy.
Latest

File photo

Illustration

File photo

Illustration

File photo

Illustration