Five and a half years after the start of his criminal trial, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stunned the political and legal system last night (Sunday) when he submitted a formal request for presidential clemency to President Yitzhak Herzog. The dramatic move comes just two and a half weeks after U.S. President Donald Trump sent Herzog a letter on Netanyahu’s behalf.
In a video released shortly after the request was submitted, Netanyahu said that “continuing the trial is tearing us apart from within”, shifting the burden of one of the most consequential decisions of this presidency directly to Herzog.
The request raises immediate questions: why is the prime minister seeking clemency now, why not pursue a plea agreement, and how does this align with his longstanding claim that the cases against him are “collapsing”?
The Charges Netanyahu Faces
Netanyahu is currently standing trial on bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in three separate cases:
-
Case 1000 (The Gifts Affair):
Netanyahu and his family allegedly received benefits worth approximately 700,000 shekels from businessmen Arnon Milchan and James Packer. The indictment includes no bribery charge but accuses Netanyahu of receiving luxury items such as cigars and champagne — and of performing official actions that benefited Milchan, including allegedly directing then-Communications Ministry Director-General Shlomo Filber to advise Milchan privately on a major media merger.
-
Case 2000 (Netanyahu–Mozes Affair):
Netanyahu is accused of discussing an arrangement with Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon “Noni” Mozes to secure favorable media coverage in exchange for regulatory actions that would weaken rival newspaper Israel Hayom. There is no bribery charge in this case.
-
Case 4000 (Bezeq–Elovitch Affair):
The prosecution alleges that in exchange for favorable coverage on the Walla news site, Netanyahu took actions — directly or indirectly — that benefited businessman Shaul Elovitch and his companies by more than 1.8 billion shekels. This is the only case in which Netanyahu is charged with bribery.
While key portions of the prosecution’s case suffered major setbacks, Case 1000 remains largely stable.
Why Not a Plea Bargain?
Efforts to negotiate a plea agreement were explored in the past. Judges even encouraged a renewed attempt, and mediation was proposed — but all discussions collapsed.
The main obstacle is Case 1000, which centers on benefits and a severe conflict of interest. Any plea deal would almost certainly include a moral turpitude clause, barring Netanyahu from political life for years.
Netanyahu has consistently refused any agreement that would force his exit from Israeli politics.
How the Clemency Process Works
A presidential pardon is intended to mitigate the consequences of a completed criminal process — but Netanyahu is seeking intervention before the trial concludes, an exceptional and almost unprecedented request.
Once submitted, the request is passed to the Pardons Department in the Ministry of Justice, which gathers opinions from the state prosecution and other authorities.
The Justice Minister issues an opinion as well, followed by counsel in the President’s Office. All materials are then reviewed by the President, whose decision may be challenged in the High Court of Justice.
Netanyahu’s Arguments for Clemency
Netanyahu claims that:
-
Ongoing testimony obligations — up to three court appearances per week — impede his ability to govern and manage political affairs.
-
Granting clemency would help “heal the rifts” in Israeli society.
-
The trial has created an institutional struggle between branches of government, which a pardon could help ease.
He asserts that the pardon is necessary for public and national reasons, despite the criminal process still being active.
A Rare Precedent: The Shin Bet Affair
The only comparable case in Israeli history occurred in the 1980s, when then-president Chaim Herzog (the current president’s father) pardoned Shin Bet officials involved in the killing of two captured terrorists during the Bus 300 Affair.
The pardons were issued before any investigation, justified by claims of national security and lack of viable alternatives — an extremely narrow precedent.
The High Court ultimately upheld the decision, stressing that such a step is warranted only under “completely exceptional circumstances.”
Impact on the Remaining Defendants
The trial will continue for the remaining defendants. If Netanyahu admits wrongdoing as part of a pardon arrangement, his confession could be used as evidence against them.
Negotiations for a plea agreement with Arnon Mozes were previously discussed, and a presidential pardon for Netanyahu could reopen the door to such talks.
Netanyahu’s request now places President Herzog at the center of a historic constitutional moment, with implications reaching far beyond the fate of the prime minister — touching the justice system, public trust, and the future of Israeli politics.
Comments