Israeli writer and politician Michael Kleiner, Chairman of the Likud Party Court, believes that the recommendation of the Pardon Department of the Ministry of Justice regarding the pardon request submitted by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has increased his chances of obtaining a presidential pardon, contrary to what is popular in the media.
In an article published in Maariv newspaper, Kleiner explained that the Pardon Department’s recommendation, despite its request not to activate the pardon power while the trial was continuing, did not close the door to this possibility, but rather implicitly acknowledged the constitutional authority of Israeli President Isaac Herzog to consider the request.
He pointed out that the legal dispute is centered between the Israeli government’s judicial advisor, Gali Beharav-Meara, who believes that pardon consideration does not take place until a final conviction is issued, and the Pardon Department in the Ministry of Justice, which believes that the president is authorized to determine whether he has the authority to consider a pardon request even before conviction.
Kleiner added that the Israeli Supreme Court does not usually interfere in presidential pardon decisions except in exceptional cases related to corruption or extreme unreasonableness, considering that any decision Herzog might make would be relatively immune from judicial interference.
In his analysis, Kleiner used a legal precedent dating back to the decision of the former head of the Central Elections Commission, Judge Yitzhak Amit, who decided to cancel the candidacy of Knesset member Amichai Shekli before the Supreme Court invalidated the decision, considering that this precedent reflects the court’s tendency to adhere to clear legal interpretations.
He also pointed out that the concept of “pardon” in comparative legal systems, such as Britain and the United States, is not limited to those against whom final rulings have been issued, but rather it can be granted in political, humanitarian, or exceptional circumstances.
Kleiner described the decision before Herzog as “historic and fateful,” in light of the sharp political division within Israel, considering that granting an unconditional pardon to Netanyahu may constitute, from his point of view, a step to contain the internal crisis.
He concluded by saying that Netanyahu’s political future must be decided through the ballot boxes in the upcoming elections, and not only through the ongoing judicial process in the files known in the media as “Netanyahu cases.”
