Publications condemning Bennett and photos from the Western Wall: Netanyahu’s involvement in demands for coverage

In the appendix attached to the indictment, the prosecution notes that “during the periods relevant to the first indictment, a ‘give and take’ relationship existed between the defendants Netanyahu and the defendants Shaul Elowitz and Iris Elowitz. Self ‘”.

Some of the requests detailed in the amended indictment concerned publications against Netanyahu’s opponents. For example, there are demands regarding the publication of publications regarding the support of MK Naftali Bennett for Tzipi Livni and Shelly Yachimovich – a demand that was transferred to Alovich through the businessman Zeev Rubinstein against whom the case against him was closed.

According to the amended indictment, Netanyahu was also involved in demanding an article about the work of Gilat, Naftali Bennett’s wife, at a kosher restaurant. Another piece of information that was not raised at the end was supposed to deal with the participation of Naftali Bennett’s father in demonstrations against Yitzhak Rabin. According to the prosecution, Netanyahu was involved in a demand that was passed through Rubinstein to Alovich and was dealt with in his involvement. The news, it was said, was shelved at Rubinstein’s request.

In addition, a demand was raised for the publication of MK Yair Lapid’s son’s participation in the housing cabinet meeting. The demand, it was alleged, was transferred through businessman Rubinstein to then-Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua and treated for his involvement in accordance with general instructions received from defendant Elowitz. The demand was met.

The name of President Reuven (Ruby) Rivlin also came up in calls to skew coverage. According to the amended indictment, a demand was made to publish criticisms that President Rivlin had previously said about the Supreme Court. Defendant Netanyahu, it was noted, was involved in a demand passed through his then-spokesman Nir Hefetz to Walla CEO Yeshua.

The original indictment in the 4000 case, filed in January 2020, included a series of expressions that referred to Netanyahu and his wife’s requests or to Netanyahu and his family from the Elowitz couple. Defendants’ attorneys demanded that the prosecution amend the indictment so that the sections would specify who exactly demanded and received the benefits – the “gift” – and who complied with the demand and for what consideration in order to prove the bribes.

The three judges of the panel – Rivka Friedman-Feldman, Oded Shaham and Moshe Bar-Am, accepted the request and ordered the prosecution to separate Netanyahu and his family and the Elowitz couple, and to detail the events. The judges criticized the fact that the original indictment included descriptions of cases of Netanyahu’s demands to intervene in the publications, and wrote that “there is no room for examples” and that the accuser should detail Malovich’s demands.

According to the amended indictment, in January 2016, Netanyahu demanded the publication of a poll of seats according to which the Likud maintains its power, Moshe Kahlon crashes and Lapid strengthens. But Elovich refused the demand so as not to upset Kahlon, who was serving as finance minister at the time.

Netanyahu, it was alleged, was involved in several demands for the publication of articles dealing with journalist Raviv Drucker. For example, a demand was made to publish an article by journalist Erel Segal about Drucker. Defendant Netanyahu, according to the amended indictment, was involved in the demand that was then submitted through Ran Baretz for salvation. And that the demand was met.

There was also a demand to publish a survey according to which most of the public believes in defendant Netanyahu and not in journalist Drucker. The survey, it was noted, was published with the involvement of the Elowitzs. In addition, a request was made to publish details about a connection between a student who worked to expose the expenses of the Prime Minister’s residence and Drucker. This demand was conveyed through Rubinstein to salvation.

Other demands concerned publications about Netanyahu’s work as prime minister. They included requests to highlight positive publications and hide critical articles. The demands included the publication of Netanyahu’s speech at the signing of umbrella agreements in Be’er Sheva and the publication of an article on Netanyahu’s successful handling of the railway construction crisis. A demand was also made to publish an article about the fact that defendant Netanyahu instructed then-Minister Gilad Ardan to act to enforce illegal construction in the Arab sector.

In February 2016, a demand was submitted for the removal of an article concerning a criticism voiced in Germany, according to which defendant Netanyahu distorted the words of Chancellor Angela Merkel. The article deteriorated until it was removed Full of the Elowitz couple’s involvement, but the indictment does not detail Netanyahu’s involvement.

In May 2016, Netanyahu was involved in a demand for the publication of an article about his inclusion in the list of the ten most revered men in the United States, and after the demand was not met – two months later another demand was passed by the Nir Hefetz family to ask Elowitz – and this time it was granted.

On January 22, 2013, the day of the 19th Knesset election, demands were made to publish photos of defendant Netanyahu from a visit to the Western Wall, to post photos of himself and his wife at the polls, to download a photo of Naftali Bennett and his wife and to download a video of Rivlin at the polls. In this case, too, the amended indictment states, Netanyahu was involved in demands made through businessman Rubinstein to then-CEO Yeshua. The demand was addressed with Elowitz’s involvement.

A series of demands by Netanyahu and his family dealt with publications about the expenses of the prime minister’s residence: Among other things, a demand was made to remove an article about Sarah Netanyahu taking the deposit on the bottle turnover at the prime minister’s residence, to remove the high-cost advertisement for the hotel 2013 and the cost of the bed in the plane used by the couple in the amount of about half a million shekels.

On behalf of Prime Minister Netanyahu, in response: “The balloon of the 4000 case exploded. The prosecutor’s office barely managed to find 10 media requests by the prime minister to Walla in 4 years, an average of one request in six months, while during this period about 10,000 articles were written about the prime minister in Walla.

“It’s a tiny fraction of the number of other politicians’ references to publishers, editors and reporters. All other media references that the State Attorney’s Office mentions are routine inquiries on behalf of the spokespersons, such as the speech of the Prime Minister in the Congress against the Iranian nuclear issue or the speech of his political visits to Japan.

“Absurdly, the prosecution defines these routine spokesperson actions as criminal acts. The bluff was exposed and it turned out that there were no unusual requests from the prime minister and there was no unusual response from Walla. It is interesting to see how many times the prosecutor and the prosecution approached certain lawyers, editors and publishers in The last 4 years.

“And the height of the absurdity – nowhere in the world has an indictment been filed against a public figure because of media coverage. This is what happens when you try in every way to sew a case for a strong right-wing prime minister.”