News 13 legal commentator Aviad Glickman spoke this morning (Wednesday) with Golan Yokfaz and Anat Davidov on their program on 103FM about the decision of Spokesman Mandelblit, who stated last night that the money received by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from his cousin Natan Milikovsky is a “forbidden gift,” explaining: “Mandelblit changed with him following the stock affair, in which it was revealed that there is a business relationship between the two. The Prime Minister is elected by the public. Even if it is a cousin and there is a business relationship between them, he cannot receive money without returning it. “
Demonstrations against Netanyahu in Balfour due to the postponement of the trial. (Photo: Prime Minister)
Golan: Let’s talk about the spokesman’s statement from yesterday regarding the money that Netanyahu allegedly owes.
“About two years ago, Navot Tel Tzur, who was Netanyahu’s attorney at the time, wrote a request to the Permits Committee to obtain funding for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s legal defense. There he reveals an amazing detail – That Netanyahu has already received $ 300,000 from his cousin Natan Milikovsky without a permit from the Permits Committee. Of course it immediately turns on red lights for everyone, the ombudsman is required for this matter but states that the matter is not a prohibited gift because it is a cousin helping him. However, the previous comptroller’s permit committee states that although it is not a prohibited gift a public servant is still forbidden to receive. They demand that all the $ 300,000 be returned to Milikowski. ”
“A new critic arrives and the committee is again required to answer this question following Netanyahu’s request, but this time states something completely different – it accepts Netanyahu’s position that $ 270,000 was not intended for him at all, but for his wife’s legal protection, so he only has to return $ 30,000 What’s Happening Yesterday? In response to a petition by the Movement for Quality of Government and the Movement for Purity Mandelblit changes position. He says that in light of the stock affair, An affair investigated by the Ministry of Justice about the business relationship between Milikowski and Netanyahu who sold him shares at a very cheap price and Netanyahu sold expensively and made a lot of money, so There is business between the two. Therefore, the $ 300,000 that Milikovsky gave Netanyahu is a forbidden gift“.
Golan: I mean it’s not money he got from the “cousin” but a business partner?
“Exactly. Evidently, Mandelblit also mentions there that the fact that Malikovsky did not give anything to Netanyahu’s brother, but only to Netanyahu. Of course, this is probably also related to Netanyahu’s public role.”
Golan: Did the ombudsman need the High Court to voice this position?
“I guess even without the High Court he would have ruled it out, but because there is a petition he is obligated to give that position.”
Golan: In essence, even if they are business partners, in the end he is his cousin. This fact cannot be denied.
“It does not matter. There is nothing to do, The Prime Minister is elected by the public. Even if it is a cousin and there is a business relationship between them, he cannot receive money without returning it“.
Golan: What does this change the division? If really out of the 300, 270 went for legal advice to Sarah Netanyahu?
“Once it is a forbidden gift, it is also forbidden for Netanyahu’s wife. That is why there is a big problem here for Netanyahu. Now he will have to return $ 300,000, which is not a simple sum. I guess the High Court will go with the adviser here and then there will be no choice“.
Anat: Another matter. The Supreme Court approves a telephone search of Netanyahu’s advisers.
“True. Two judges in the majority opinion. The creators turned upside down – Vassolberg called for this matter, against the dissenting opinion of Hanan Meltzer.”
Golan: What is the practical meaning? Will they be rummaged through devices?
“Ostensibly yes. But the Supreme Court also sets a delay in execution for 15 days and exceptionally gives them the opportunity to submit a request for further discussion. I guess this request will be accepted and then we will see many months until this issue is resolved. If this ruling remains then “.