Opposition leader Yair Lapid testified at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial at the Jerusalem District Court on Monday.
The Yesh Atid head is taking the stand for Case 1000, in which Netanyahu is alleged to have received expensive gifts from Israeli businessman Arnon Milchan in exchange for aid in his business affairs. Lapid’s testimony discussed a tax law that Milchan allegedly lobbied for and his personal relationship with Milchan.
Lapid entered the courtroom with fanfare from photographers and the clacking of their cameras. Abnormally, the photographers swarmed into the courtroom after Lapid, momentarily allowed to film and photograph the witness before the bench. The courthouse saw heavy security and increased checks ahead of Lapid’s testimony.
The furor denoted the high political drama of having an opposition leader testify against a sitting prime minister — but the importance of Lapid’s testimony was challenged by the briefness of the testimony. The prosecution questioned Lapid for around 40 minutes.
Humor and details
Lapid took the stand, presenting an image of good humor, and recalled the start of his political career to time as finance minister for Netanyahu from 2013 to 2014. He also detailed his relationship history with Milchan, who he had known since he was a journalist, having written an article about him in the 1990s. They were in sporadic connection, but for a few months Lapid worked for Milchan, establishing a television company for the businessman in the United States, but “realized it want for me.”
Israeli foreign minister and Head of the Yesh Atid party Yair Lapid walks next to Head of opposition and head of the Likud party Benjamin Netanyahu at the assembly hall for a special session in memory of Israel’s first Prime Minister David Ben Gurion, on November 8, 2021. (credit: OLIVIER FITOUSSI/FLASH90)Lapid said that he was aware that Netanyahu also had a relationship with Milchan.
Lapid and Milchan would try to meet whenever the businessman would visit Israel, and met for dinner in 2014 for dinner and requested to meet the then-finance minister and a legal representative. They met at Lapid’s home office, where Milchan lobbied for the extension of a tax exemption law by ten years. Lapid referred to his ministry’s legal advisor, who recommended against the change. Lapid said that he didn’t go into detail with her.
The defense noted that Lapid had told police during the investigation that it was part of the experience as a minister to constantly have people lobby about what policies they think are best.
“You get a lot of people telling you what’s best for Israel,” Lapid said on Monday.
Milchan said that the tax law change would be good for Israel, would bring good people and improve the economy, according to the testimony.
Milchan had also wanted Lapid to meet a friend of his who wanted to move to Israel, as a case study for how the current tax and legal situation made it difficult for people who wanted to make Aliyah to transfer their businesses and assets.
Netanyahu briefly mentioned the law twice to Lapid. The prime minister thought the extension was a good idea, but Lapid said that he didn’t. Under query from the judges, Lapid said that he felt that Netanyahu was “checking off a box” by asking about it on behalf of Milchan. The defense questioned Lapid’s recounting of the stories of meeting with Netanyahu, and different versions of what Netanyahu said. Attorney Amit Haddad challenged where the meetings would have happened by cross-referencing Lapid’s schedule and Netanyahu’s. Lapid’s good cheer turned to annoyance in the cross-examination, as Haddad sought to demonstrate Lapid as having a tendency to exaggerate with stories by using an example of different recountings about events in his military service.
The whole episode lasted six weeks
Lapid said that the whole episode only lasted 1.5 months, and the defense noted the importance that he didn’t think it was problematic at the time and when he was called for interviews with the police he didn’t know what the issue would be.
The Defense highlighted that Lapid did not meet with Milchan at the request of Netanyahu and that Netanyahu didn’t pressure Lapid to adopt the policy recommendations after the meetings. The defense said that this trend continued with a lack of pressure on the finance ministers after him.
Lapid had trouble recalling the exact timeline of events at the time, saying that many of them happened years ago. It was argued that any discrepancies were due to the passing of time rather than an intent to mislead.
After Lapid, the next known major witness to testify is Milchan himself on June 25. As the businessman is ostensibly too Ill to travel to Israel, and due to his key role in the “Gifts Affair” case, the court permitted Milchan to testify via video call from the Israeli embassy in London.
Lawyers from both the prosecution and defense will be present in London, but the court said that the format could change if technical were to arise.
Sara Netanyahu is expected to be present at Milchan’s testimony, after the court on May 23 approved the Netanyahu team’s request to allow the “the presence of the accused and a first-degree relative.”
According to the testimony of former Netanyahu chief of staff turned state witness Ari Harow, Milchan had plied the Netanyahu family with cigars and champagne in return for aid in securing a US visa. Netanyahu allegedly spoke to then-secretary of state John Kerry about the matter. Lapid said on Monday that he didn’t see Netanyahu any such gifts.
Comments are closed.