JERUSALEM – It was a split-screen show that encapsulated the disconcerting condition of Israel and its democracy.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared in a Jerusalem court on Monday to open the key and supporting phase of his corruption trial. At the same time, just three kilometers from the other side of the city, representatives of his party pleaded with the president of the country to instruct him to form the next government of Israel.
For many here, the extraordinary convergence of events was an illustration of a political and constitutional malaise that afflicts the nation that is getting worse every year.
After four inconclusive elections in two years, Netanyahu, Israel’s longest serving prime minister, accused of bribery, fraud and breach of trust, and who denies wrongdoing, remains the most polarizing figure on the political scene. But he is also the leader of Israel’s largest party, which won the majority of seats in national elections last month.
With Netanyahu’s future at stake, analysts say his best bet for overcoming his legal problems is to stay in power and gain some form of immunity.
But since neither the pro-Netanyahu party bloc or the opposition group to it has managed to assemble a coalition that could command a viable parliamentary majority, Israel appears stagnant, unable to fully forgive or remove it from the scene.
Now, experts say, the country’s democratic system is in the dock.
“Netanyahu and his supporters do not claim their innocence, but they are attacking the very legitimacy of the trial and the judicial system,” said Shlomo Avineri, professor emeritus of political science at the Hebrew University.
“It is the prime minister’s right to go to court and plead not guilty,” he said. “But his defense is an attack on the legitimacy of the constitutional order.”
Mr Netanyahu after made a statement which was broadcast live accusing the prosecution of carrying out a “witch hunt” against him and trying to remove him by means of a judicial coup.
He accused the prosecution of acting illegally by deleting recordings, ignoring testimonies that did not fit in his thesis and blackmailing witnesses, among other things. “This is how they try to overthrow a strong right-wing prime minister. This is what an attempted administrative coup looks like. “
Israel was approaching an unprecedented constitutional crisis, Professor Avineri that said, its depth is underlined by the symbolism of the two processes that unfold in parallel.
The law gives President Reuven Rivlin plenty of leeway to nominate to form a government. Rivlin, a longtime rival of Netanyahu, said he would act as all former presidents did and it would be up to whoever had the best chance of forming a government that would win the confidence of the new Parliament.
The divisions took place noisily on Monday in the street in front of the Jerusalem District Court, where dozens of protesters for and against Netanyahu gathered on opposite sides of the court.
Anti-corruption protesters raised signs listing the charges against the prime minister and shouted into megaphones. At a small stage, lawmakers from his conservative Likud party claimed that the legal process was being used to oust Netanyahu after his opponents failed to do so at the polls.
“In the justice system, our choice of votes is being murdered,” said Galit Distel Etebaryan, a newly elected Likud legislator.
The drama of the State of Israel v. Benjamin Netanyahu revolves around three cases in which Netanyahu is accused of negotiating official favors in exchange for gifts from wealthy tycoons. Gifts ranged from deliveries of expensive cigars and champagne to the least tangible of flattering coverage on major news outlets.
The first case to be tried, known as Case 4000, is the most important and the only one in which he was accused of bribery.
According to the prosecution, Netanyahu used his power as prime minister and communications minister at the time to help Shaul Elovitch, a media tycoon and friend, in a business merger that earned Elovitch tens of millions of dollars. In return, Walla, a leading Hebrew news site owned by the Elovitch telecommunications company, provided the Netanyahu family with favorable coverage, especially during election times.
The long-awaited court session opened on Monday with a lengthy speech by the chief prosecutor, Liat Ben-Ari. Mr. Netanyahu, who was required to be present, sat at the back of the courtroom.
Describing the case as “significant and serious”, Ms. Ben-Ari said that, according to the indictment, Mr. Netanyahu, listed as “Defendant No. 1”, “misused the great government power entrusted to him” , demand favors from media owners to promote their personal affairs, including “their desire to be reelected”.
Netanyahu left the court before the first witness, Ilan Yeshua, the former chief executive of Walla, spoke out. With more than 330 witnesses expected to appear, the trial could last for years.
Mr. Yeshua described how he would receive instructions from intermediaries to post or highlight positive stories about Mr. Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, as well as items that put his political rivals in a negative light.
He said he forwarded the requests to the newsroom and described his daily and hourly struggles with the editors as a “nightmare”.
Although many Israelis saw the trial as a triumph of the rule of law, critics said it was a distortion of justice, arguing that all politicians seek positive media coverage.
“Even if, after several years and tens of millions of shekels, the trial ends, as it should, with the acquittal of all parties, the country will bear the costs of this politicization of criminal law for many years”, Avi Bell, a law professor and senior member of the Kohelet Policy Forum, a conservative Jerusalem-based think tank, said in a statement
The parallel political process underway at Rivlin’s official residence did little to dispel the feeling that Israel remained trapped in a cycle of political uncertainty and instability.
One after another, delegations from the 13 parties elected to the Knesset came on Monday to announce which candidate they endorsed to form the next government.
Netanyahu, whose Likud party won 30 seats in the 120-seat parliament, received 52 recommendations from his extreme right and ultra-orthodox allies. It remained to be seen how many of his opponents could muster.
The remaining 90 parliamentary seats are divided among a dozen other parties. Yair Lapid’s centrist party, Yesh Atid, came in second, with 17 seats. All others resulted in single digit wins.
The political impasse was compounded by Netanyahu’s refusal to step aside during the trial and by the inconsistency of the anti-Netanyahu camp, formed by parties with conflicting agendas. Some have ruled out the possibility of participating in a government with others.
Many analysts believe the stalemate will lead to a fifth election, although some small parties that now have a lot of power risk being eliminated in any quick return to the polls.
The sheer number of parties is a sign that “Israeli cohesion is falling apart,” said Yedidia Stern, president of the Jewish People’s Policy Institute in Jerusalem.
“Israeli society is very fragmented,” he said. “The lack of cohesion in Israeli society is not going to go away just because an election is going one way or the other.”