JERUSALEM – It was a split-screen spectacle that summed up the confusing state of Israel and its democracy.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared in court in Jerusalem on Monday for the opening of the most important evidence phase of his corruption trial. At the same time, just two kilometers across the city, representatives of his party requested the president of the country to instruct him to form the next government of Israel.
For many here, the extraordinary confluence of events was an illustration of a political and constitutional unrest plaguing the country, which is getting worse year by year.
After four undecided elections in two years, Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, who is accused of bribery, fraud and breach of trust, and who denies wrongdoing, is the most polarizing figure on the political scene. But he is also the leader of Israel’s largest party, which won the most seats in national elections last month.
With the future of mr. Netanyahu at stake, analysts say is the best way to overcome his legal problems, to stay in power and gain some kind of immunity.
But without the pro-Netanyahu party parties or the grouping opposing him being able to form a coalition that can command a viable parliamentary majority, Israel seems trapped, unable to fully condone him or to remove him from the scene.
Now, according to experts, the country’s democratic system is in the dock.
“Netanyahu and his supporters are not claiming innocence, but are attacking the legitimacy of the trial and the justice system,” said Shlomo Avineri, an emeritus professor of political science at the Hebrew University.
“It is the right of the prime minister to come to court and plead not guilty,” he said. “But his defense is an attack on the legitimacy of the constitutional order.”
Mr Netanyahu later made a statement which was broadcast live, in which the prosecution is accused of carrying out a “witch hunt” against him and attempting to evict him by a lawsuit.
He accused the prosecution of acting illegally by erasing recordings, ignoring evidence that did not fit their thesis and, among other things, blackmailing witnesses. ‘This is how they try to bring down a strong prime minister from the right. This is what an attempted administrative coup looks like. ‘
Israel was closer to an unprecedented constitutional crisis, Professor Avineri said, its depth is underlined by the symbolism of the two processes developing in parallel.
The law gives President Reuven Rivlin much space in which he nominates to form a government. Mr. Rivlin, a former rival of Netanyahu, has said he will act as all former presidents do and instruct whoever has the best chance of forming a government that would gain the confidence of the new parliament.
The sections are playing loudly on Monday in the street outside the district court in Jerusalem, where dozens of protesters for and against Mr. Netanyahu rallied on either side of the court.
Anti-corruption protesters held placards recording the charges against the prime minister and rumbling through megaphones. On a small stage, legislators from his conservative Likud party claimed that the legal process was being used to oust Mr. To put Netanyahu down after his opponents did not do so through the ballot box.
“In the legal system, our choice of ballot papers is being killed,” said Galit Distel Etebaryan, a newly elected Likud lawmaker.
The drama of the State of Israel against Benjamin Netanyahu revolves around three cases in which Mr. Netanyahu is accused of trading official favors in exchange for gifts from rich empires. The gifts ranged from deliveries of expensive cigars and Champagne to the less tangible one of flattering coverage in leading news sales.
The first case to be heard, known as Case 4000, is the most weighty and the only case in which he is charged with bribery.
According to the charge sheet, Mr. Netanyahu at the time was using his power as prime minister and communications minister to help Shaul Elovitch, a media magnate and friend, in a merger that would benefit Mr. Elovitch had up to ten million dollars. In return, Walla, a leading Hebrew news website run by Mr. Elovitch’s telecommunications company is owned, providing the Netanyahu family with favorable coverage, especially around election time.
The long-awaited court hearing opened on Monday with a lengthy speech by Chief Prosecutor Liat Ben-Ari. Mr. Netanyahu, who was supposed to be present, sat in the back of the courtroom.
Ben-Ari described the case as ‘significant and serious’ and said that according to the charge sheet, Mr. Netanyahu, who as’ accused no. 1 ‘is called’ the great governmental power entrusted to him has misused ‘. to claim favors from media owners to promote his personal affairs, including ‘his desire to be re-elected’.
Mr. Netanyahu left the court before the first witness, Ilan Yeshua, the former CEO of Walla, took the stand. With more than 330 witnesses expected to appear, the trial could take years.
Mr. Yeshua described how he would receive instructions from go-betweens to tell positive stories about mr. Posting or highlighting Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, as well as articles that put his political rivals in a negative light.
He said he passed on the requests to the news office, describing his daily and hourly struggle with editors as a “nightmare”.
While many Israelis saw the trial as a triumph for the rule of law, critics said it was a distortion of the law, arguing that all politicians seek positive media coverage.
“Although the trial ends, after several years and tens of millions of shekels, as it should be, with an acquittal for all parties, the country will still bear the cost of this politicization of criminal law for many years to come,” Avi Bell said. a professor of law and a senior fellow at the Kohelet Policy Forum, a conservative, leaning, Jerusalem-based think tank, said in a statement
The parallel political process described in mr. Rivlin’s official residence was underway, the feeling that Israel remained trapped in a loop of political uncertainty and instability, little drove away.
One after another, delegations from the 13 parties elected to the Knesset arrived on Monday to announce which candidate they endorse to form the next government.
Mr. Netanyahu, whose Likud party won 30 seats in parliament with 120 seats, is assured of 52 recommendations from his right-wing and ultra-Orthodox allies. It remains to be seen how many of his opponents could pick up.
The remaining 90 parliamentary seats are divided between a dozen other parties. Yair Lapid’s center, Yesh Atid, finished second with 17 seats. All the others scored a single figure.
The political stalemate was exacerbated by the refusal of Mr. Netanyahu to step aside while on trial and through the cohesion of the anti-Netanyahu camp, made up of parties with conflicting agendas. Some ruled out sitting with others in a government.
Many analysts believe that the stalemate will lead to a fifth election, although some small parties that now hold a lot of power will risk the extinction in a quick return to the ballot box.
The large number of parties is a sign that “Israeli cohesion is unraveling,” said Yedidia Stern, president of the Jewish People Policy Institute in Jerusalem.
“Israeli society is very fragmented,” he said. “The lack of cohesion in Israeli society will not go away just because an election is going this way.”