Netanyahu Returns to Court: "I Didn't Know, I Didn't Think"

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s criminal trial resumed Wednesday with continued cross-examination in Case 4000, the Bezeq–Walla affair. Prosecutors allege that Netanyahu granted regulatory benefits worth hundreds of millions of shekels to Bezeq owner Shaul Elovitch in exchange for systematic intervention in Walla’s coverage to favor Netanyahu and his family. The case is joined with Cases 1000 and 2000, but Case 4000 is considered the most serious due to the alleged direct quid-pro-quo between regulation and media coverage.

Hearings this week centered on a four-minute phone call between Netanyahu and former close associate turned state witness Nir Hefetz. According to the indictment, roughly fifteen minutes after that call, instructions were conveyed to Elovitch and then-Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua to publish favorable coverage relating to Meni Naftali, the former caretaker of the official residence whose lawsuit against Sara Netanyahu drew intense public attention.

Naftali alleged verbal abuse, humiliating treatment, and hostile working conditions during his 2011–2012 employment. A labor court later accepted his claims and awarded compensation. Prosecutors argue that Netanyahu’s interest in shaping Walla’s coverage of Naftali is part of the pattern of intervention central to Case 4000.

On Tuesday, prosecutors reviewed Hefetz’s earlier testimony in which he admitted that his instruction to Walla that “the headline be taken from this segment” reflected a confidence he would never display with other outlets. Asked why he issued such explicit directives, Hefetz responded, “Because the prime minister asked me.”

Prosecutors also presented evidence showing changes to Walla’s homepage following a series of late-night calls among Netanyahu’s office, Elovitch, and Hefetz. An article on the state’s appeal in Naftali’s case was posted, removed, and later reinstated after additional communication, which prosecutors say illustrates a pattern of editorial manipulation.

On the stand Wednesday, Netanyahu insisted these requests were “standard” and routine in the media world, denying any quid-pro-quo or awareness that Elovitch might have been acting due to business interests tied to government regulation. “I didn’t know, didn’t think, and didn’t make such a connection,” he said. Netanyahu maintained that his interactions with Elovitch were no different from conversations he held with other media owners.

Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh challenged that claim, arguing that the evidence shows deliberate efforts by Elovitch and Walla personnel to serve Netanyahu’s interests. Pressing Netanyahu on Elovitch’s financial stakes, she asked whether the collapsing state of Bezeq under government reforms could reasonably be separated from their relationship. Netanyahu rejected the suggestion, calling her characterization misleading and insisting, “We never spoke about regulation.”

The trial continues.