Prime Minister Netanyahu’s request to Israeli president Isaac Herzog for a presidential pardon in his ongoing trials for alleged corruption – which began in May 2020 – has understandably triggered fierce debate in Israel.
Proponents of a pardon for the prime minister argue that one is necessary given his experience and expertise, if only to allow him to lead Israel without distraction in perhaps its most fraught circumstances in decades. However, opponents stress that granting one before his guilt or innocence is established would tend to undermine the rule of law, which they say must be upheld regardless of an accused’s political stature.
While this is surely an issue for Israelis to decide, we are also constrained to note that we think the pardon proponents have the better argument. A nation’s stability and strategic necessity must take precedence over what is largely esoteric conjecture about respect for the rule of law.
In fact, it is hard to disagree with those who maintain that Netanyahu has an unparalleled depth of experience, which would plainly be compelling in navigating the current security and diplomatic challenges Israel now faces. Indeed, it would be counterintuitive to believe that at this juncture he is not the most seasoned Israeli statesman or that the seemingly perpetual legal proceedings do not present a constant distraction.
We are not unmindful that Netanyahu has been indicted on charges of fraud, bribery, and breach of trust, and that his pardon request did not include admissions of guilt or expressions of remorse, which Israeli legal experts and opposition leaders say are, and should, ordinarily be part of the standard pardon procedure.
But one does not have to buy into the Netanyahu contention that his being prosecuted is not a legal pursuit but a “political, unjustified prosecution” and “witch hunt.” And at all events the significance of the charges themselves – which he denies – is eclipsed by the probable damage to Israel’s national interests if the prosecution of Netanyahu continues unabated.
The long-running trial has also kept a negative picture of Netanyahu on the front burner for years, bitterly dividing the country when unity was and is sorely needed. It also encourages those who falsely accuse Israel of all manner of wrongdoing and their amen corner that its leader is morally corrupt and cannot be trusted.
Unfortunately, the lawfare phenomenon directed at Donald Trump, however apt the analogy may or not be, has made us here in the U.S. particularly sensitive to that sort of thing.
In sum, the pro-pardon advocates have the right idea. Israel requires its most seasoned leader, freed up to run things without distractions. By definition, pardons are designed to vary the rules to accommodate unusual needs. This is one of those times, and one should be granted to the prime minister.