High-profile case9/18/2026

The Presumption of Innocence Does Not Depend on Political Sympathies

In an opinion column for Ynet, Professor Guy Hochman calls for applying the presumption of innocence equally to Benjamin Netanyahu and former Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi. This is not a court ruling: the source does not report a new verdict or any change in legislation.

Key facts

•The article is an opinion column, not a court ruling
•Netanyahu’s trial has been underway since 2020
•Cases 1000, 2000, and 4000 are mentioned
•No indictment has yet been filed against Tomer-Yerushalmi
•The source does not specify proceeding numbers or the exact publication date

What the Dispute Is About

The author notes that the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, while the defendant is not required to prove their innocence. In his view, public and political judgments cannot replace a court’s examination of the evidence. If Netanyahu’s guilt is not proven, he must be acquitted regardless of public attitudes toward him.

Why the Situations Differ

According to the column, no indictment has yet been filed against Tomer-Yerushalmi, although she admitted that she authorized the release of materials to the media. Netanyahu’s trial has been underway since 2020, following investigations, a decision by the Attorney General, a hearing, and the filing of an indictment. The court has already heard witnesses, reviewed documents, and conducted cross-examinations; the prosecution’s presentation of evidence has concluded, and Netanyahu has testified over dozens of court days.

Netanyahu’s Three Cases

In Case 1000, the dispute concerns the quantity of cigars and other gifts from Arnon Milchan, the manner in which they were provided, and their legal characterization. In Case 2000, Netanyahu’s conversations with Arnon Mozes were recorded; the prosecution and defense disagree over whether they involved an actual exchange of favorable coverage for actions against the newspaper Israel Hayom. In Case 4000, according to the source, the judges again pointed to difficulties in proving the bribery charge and suggested that the prosecution consider dropping that part of the charge.

The Decision Remains with the Court

The author emphasizes that the presumption of innocence does not negate facts, evidence, or differences between cases. It means that judges provide the final legal assessment after the parties’ positions have been presented and examined. The source does not report a final ruling in Netanyahu’s cases or the filing of charges against Tomer-Yerushalmi.

What this means for you

For a person suspected or accused of an offense in Israel, public condemnation does not in itself amount to proven guilt. The prosecution must establish the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, and the court makes the final assessment after examining the evidence and the parties’ arguments. At the same time, the presumption of innocence does not mean that the evidence is the same in every case or that the factual circumstances cannot be discussed.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings