Netanyahu asks Israeli president for pardon in Corruption cases
London, UK, December 1, 2025
In an extraordinary and legally unprecedented move that has triggered an immediate political and constitutional crisis, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu asks Israeli President Isaac Herzog for an immediate pardon in his ongoing corruption cases.
The request, formally submitted by the Prime Minister’s legal team on Sunday, seeks to halt the long-running trial before a verdict is reached, a step critics immediately denounced as an attempt to place the sitting Prime Minister above the rule of law.
The pardon plea centers on three separate, severe corruption cases—including charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust—that have shadowed his leadership for years.
The President’s office confirmed receipt of the appeal, labeling it an “extraordinary request which carries with it significant implications.”
The Prime Minister himself addressed the nation in a video statement, arguing that while his personal desire is to continue the trial to prove his innocence, the national interest dictates an immediate end to the proceedings.
Netanyahu contended that the mandatory requirement for him to appear in court several times a week has become an “impossible requirement” that distracts him from the critical business of governing the nation, especially during a period of intense regional instability.
This highly controversial maneuver, which seeks clemency without an admission of guilt, has split Israeli society and thrust the final decision onto President Herzog, who must now navigate a political minefield with profound implications for the independence of Israel’s judiciary.
Headline Points
Pre-Verdict Pardon Sought:
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s request is legally unprecedented in Israel, as pardons are overwhelmingly granted only after a conviction, making this a direct challenge to the judicial process.
No Admission of Guilt:
The Prime Minister’s submission, a detailed 111-page document, does not include any admission of guilt or expression of remorse, further fueling the controversy and opposition criticism.
National Interest Argument:
The core justification provided by Netanyahu is that the trial is tearing the country apart and that its termination is necessary to “lower the flames” of division and allow him to fully focus on national security and governance.
Three Cases Involved:
The pardon request covers the three major corruption cases against him: accepting costly gifts (Case 1000), attempting to negotiate favorable media coverage (Cases 2000 and 4000), the most serious of which involves charges of bribery.
Herzog’s Deliberation:
President Isaac Herzog has initiated the official review process, which requires consulting the Justice Ministry’s Pardons Department and the President’s legal advisor before rendering a decision, a process expected to take several weeks.
The legal authority to grant a pardon lies exclusively with the Israeli President under the nation’s Basic Law.
However, established protocol and legal precedent overwhelmingly dictate that such executive clemency is reserved for individuals who have already been convicted and often involves an expression of remorse or a significant change in personal circumstances that justifies mercy.
By seeking to intervene while the trial is still in session, Netanyahu is attempting to bypass the judicial outcome entirely, a move that opponents, including former rivals and opposition leaders, have publicly labeled as a dangerous precedent that undermines the principle of equality before the law.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid insisted that a pardon must be conditioned on an admission of guilt and an immediate withdrawal from political life.
The political timing of the request is also crucial. It follows weeks after a highly publicized intervention by President Donald Trump, who sent a letter to President Herzog urging him to pardon Netanyahu and terminate the trial, calling the prosecution “politically motivated.”
While the President’s office acknowledged the intense public pressure, it stressed that the decision would be made responsibly and sincerely after receiving all relevant legal opinions.
Legal experts within the Israel Democracy Institute have warned that granting a pre-conviction pardon to a sitting Prime Minister who refuses to resign or admit guilt would set a destructive constitutional precedent, raising the specter of executive overreach and potentially inviting intervention by the Supreme Court of Israel.
The specific corruption cases detailed in the request are complex and have been ongoing since the indictments were filed in 2019.
Case 4000, considered the most severe, involves allegations that Netanyahu made regulatory decisions favoring the Bezeq telecom giant in exchange for lavish gifts and favorable coverage from the Walla! news website, which is controlled by Bezeq’s then-majority shareholder.
The Prime Minister, who has consistently maintained his innocence and described the proceedings as a “witch hunt,” is now leveraging his position as wartime leader to claim the trial’s continuation is detrimental to the state’s security apparatus.
The President’s office is now engaged in a meticulous and heavily scrutinized legal process.
The 111-page submission, which lays out the defense’s arguments of procedural irregularities and the lack of malicious intent, has been forwarded to the Justice Ministry for its professional legal opinion.
This is a critical stage, as the Justice Minister’s recommendation will carry significant weight. The unprecedented nature of Netanyahu’s request means that every step of President Herzog’s deliberation is effectively on trial.
Ultimately, the decision will determine not only the immediate political future of Israel’s longest-serving Prime Minister but also the very strength and perceived independence of the nation’s democratic institutions in the face of immense political pressure.
