Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s cross-examination in Case 4000 continued on Wednesday, with the hearing shortened due to the court’s schedule constraints.
The session largely revisited disputes over whether Bezeq owner Shaul Elovitch sought to influence Walla’s news coverage to benefit Netanyahu in exchange for regulatory advantages – the core allegation in what is considered the most serious of the prime minister’s three corruption cases.
The prosecution continued its focused questions from Tuesday’s hearing on the 2011-2016 Meni Naftali affair, arguing that interventions around coverage of the state’s appeal in Naftali’s case illustrate a broader pattern of editorial manipulation to favor Netanyahu.
As presented on Tuesday, a late-night homepage shuffle at Walla – removing and later restoring an item after calls between the Prime Minister’s Office, Elovitch, and state witness Nir Hefetz – forms a key part of the prosecution’s attempt to show direct influence.
Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh pressed Netanyahu on whether he recognized that Elovitch was acting to please him because of the prime minister’s regulatory power – not because they shared political views. Netanyahu rejected the premise, insisting that he had no reason to believe Elovitch was motivated by anything other than personal views and the “standard” interactions between politicians and media owners.
“I didn’t know, didn’t think, and didn’t make such a connection,” he said. “Other publishers also had business interests, and I spoke with them to influence this or that item. It never arose in any conversation I had with Elovitch.”
Netanyahu emphasized his longstanding relationships with other media moguls to argue that such contact was routine. “I had a very close relationship, including dinners and a personal friendship,” he said, adding that none of these interactions involved trading favors.
Tirosh countered that Elovitch was uniquely positioned: the controlling shareholder of Bezeq, whose businesses were “collapsing before his eyes because of reforms you enacted.” Netanyahu did not answer the question directly, instead raising his voice in objection to her line of inquiry.
Elovitch, senior Bezeq-Walla figures were not 'operating in a black box'
The prosecution reiterated its claim that Elovitch and other senior Bezeq-Walla figures were not operating “in a black box,” telling Netanyahu that the evidence shows they acted consistently to meet his interests. “There is no world in which this wouldn’t come to your attention,” Tirosh said.
Netanyahu pushed back sharply, attacking the premise of the prosecution’s narrative and dismissing the notion that he monitored the details of Walla’s coverage. “I thought the whole thing was ridiculous and paid it no mind,” he said. “Who has time for this nonsense? I didn’t deal with it and didn’t know it. That’s the truth. You can do somersaults in the air – it won’t change that.”
He also insisted that regulatory issues were never raised with Elovitch. “We never spoke about regulation. He knows perfectly well that no one asks me for anything and I don’t do favors for anyone,” he said.
Wednesday’s testimony remained focused on the disputed motivations and patterns of interaction underlying Case 4000, with both sides leaning heavily on previously introduced time lines, phone logs, and testimonies to press their narrative.
The trial will continue with further cross-examination next week as the prosecution is set to work to tighten the alleged link between Netanyahu’s authority over communications regulation and Walla’s editorial conduct.