The hearing in the criminal trial of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu resumed on Tuesday at the Tel Aviv District Court, with prosecutors intensifying their cross-examination in Case 4000, the centerpiece of the long-running corruption proceedings.
Case 4000, known as the Bezeq-Walla affair, centers on allegations that Netanyahu, while serving as communications minister, provided regulatory benefits worth hundreds of millions of shekels to telecom giant Bezeq, then controlled by Shaul and Iris Elovitch, in return for favorable coverage on the Walla news website.
Prosecutors argue this amounted to fraud and breach of trust – and in the most serious aspect of the indictment, bribery – a charge tied to the alleged quid pro quo.
Netanyahu has rejected all wrongdoing, maintaining that his conduct was lawful and professional and insisting that favorable media coverage, even if sought, is not a crime.
A significant portion of the cross-examination has focused on the prime minister’s interest in media representation and his actions regarding content on Walla.
Netanyahu calls Meni Naftali untruthful
Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh on Tuesday pointed to exchanges alleging that messages were sent instructing Walla editors to adjust the framing of published articles, including one referenced by defense lawyers about an item on lawyer Naomi Landau, where a message from media adviser Nir Hefetz was relayed to Elovitch and then to Walla’s editorial staff to shift emphasis away from a court verdict and toward a request for cancellation.
Netanyahu said he did not remember involvement in that direction, adding that the matter was handled by Hefetz.
Tirosh challenged the prime minister’s repeated assertions that he was largely uninterested in Walla’s coverage. She highlighted instances of negative coverage, including reports relating to lawsuits over conditions at the Prime Minister’s Residence and former residence manager Meni Naftali. Netanyahu defended his reactions, calling Naftali untruthful and arguing that certain reporting was particularly sensitive and damaging.
The prosecution also revisited Netanyahu’s 2015 interview with Walla journalist Dov Gil‑Har, an interview Netanyahu acknowledged had angered him. Shortly after that broadcast, he phoned Elovitch to complain, and an internal message from Elovitch to then-Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua noted that “the boss called and said they didn’t let him finish a single answer.” Netanyahu had confirmed he called Elovitch and conveyed frustration before leaving further discussions to Hefetz.
Prosecution exhibits have included comparisons between Walla’s coverage and that of other outlets, particularly Israel Hayom, suggesting a pattern of unusually favorable treatment. Netanyahu’s defense has downplayed such comparisons, treating the document as a tangential selection of media examples rather than evidence of impropriety.
Witness testimony also touched on incidental matters, such as a social media post involving the Netanyahu family dog, which Tirosh on Tuesday portrayed as reflecting a directive to “give this [item] to Walla… and also Ilan Yeshua” so that the prime minister would appear more humane.
Netanyahu’s response was to downplay the significance, saying he did not recall specifically directing coverage of the matter and that it was “a sideline issue” that did not reflect any broader intent.
As the prime minister continues to defend himself in what is widely regarded as the most complex and politically charged trial in Israeli history, the tensions between duties of office and court obligations persist. Netanyahu’s legal team has repeatedly sought to limit the number and length of hearings, citing his responsibilities while in office. Several requests for scheduling adjustments have been granted to accommodate diplomatic and policy commitments.
Case 4000 is one of three corruption files against Netanyahu, alongside Cases 1000 and 2000. Together, these prosecutions have stretched on since 2020 and continue to divide public opinion even as proceedings inch forward.