In recent court testimony, former Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit addressed his oversight of the corruption investigation into Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mandelblit confirmed that while he officially approved the investigation, he did not review every individual police action or the entirety of the indictment documents before they were finalized. He characterized his role as providing the legal authorization for the probe to proceed, rather than managing the day-to-day tactical decisions made by investigators.

During the proceedings, Mandelblit expressed personal frustration regarding certain investigative methods, stating that some police actions left him feeling 'furious.' This admission has become a focal point for political debate. Following the testimony, several ministers from the Likud party argued that the revelations undermine the legitimacy of the prosecution. They have publicly called for the trial to be canceled, suggesting that the lack of direct oversight by the Attorney General indicates a flawed process. Conversely, legal observers note that it is standard practice for an Attorney General to delegate specific investigative tasks to police and prosecutors rather than personally supervising every procedural step. The trial continues as both sides debate the significance of Mandelblit’s testimony regarding the integrity of the investigation.