Yitzhak Herzog has been Israel’s president for more than four years but is now facing a decision that will shape the legacy of his entire term: how to respond to prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s request for a presidential pardon related to his ongoing corruption trial.
Supporters of Netanyahu argue that the time has come to end the divisive trial. Opponents warn that a clemency could undermine the rule of law and the principle of equality under the law.
Netanyahu was charged in 2019 with bribery, fraud and breach of trust. He has denied the charges and made no admission of guilt in his request for a pardon.
Herzog commented on Monday that Netanyahu’s request is clearly provoking debate and is deeply upsetting for many Israelis, across different communities. “I have already clarified that it will be handled in the most correct and precise manner,” he wrote. “I will consider solely the best interests of the state of Israel and Israeli society.”
RM Block
But what is in the best interests of the country?
Even Netanyahu’s most bitter opponents agree that a sitting prime minister attending court sessions three times a week (never mind the preparation needed in advance of each session) is not conducive to effective governance. In Israel, which is emerging from a two-year, multi-front war, and where life-and-death decisions remain a daily occurrence, such a scenario is untenable.
But it was Netanyahu himself who insisted that he could continue to function as prime minister after he was charged.
He rejected calls to temporarily step down from office, fight in court to clear his name in an expedited trial and return as prime minister if found innocent.
And so the trial has dragged on for more than five years.
Netanyahu’s request for a pardon is highly unusual on a number of levels.
Firstly, the trial is ongoing and requests for a pardon are traditionally only allowed to be submitted by convicted criminals. Some legal experts argue that on this point alone, Herzog should have rejected the request. Instead, he announced that he will consider legal opinions while carefully weighing his response.
Another unusual aspect is that Netanyahu is stubbornly insisting on his innocence and refuses to express remorse.
From the outset, he insisted that the charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust were a political witch-hunt by his opponents, designed to topple the democratically-elected right-wing government from power.
Most commentators believe that Herzog will neither reject outright nor accept Netanyahu’s request. Instead, he may seek concessions from Netanyahu in return for a pardon. The speculation over the possible concessions is endless: an agreement for early elections (the next elections have to take place by October 2026); an agreement to resign as prime minister for a limited period; setting up a state commission of inquiry into the Gaza war; and ending the government’s plans for judicial reform.
It is difficult to envisage Netanyahu agreeing to any of the above. Protracted negotiations between his lawyers and the presidential residence are likely.
The request can be viewed as a win-win for Netanyahu – either he is pardoned and the trial ends or he has more ammunition for his claims to his political base that the entire Israeli liberal establishment is pitted against him, and he can now add the presidency to the list.
[ Herzog Park denaming ‘will be seen as anti-Semitic’, says TaoiseachOpens in new window ]
