N※N

Netanyahu Declares He Won't Quit Politics Even If Granted Pardon

72

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. -won-t-quit-politics-even-if-granted-pardon.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, December 7th 2025 at 14:36 GMT by ThePrint

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-07 221 x 224 / 8716 Bytes

2025-12-07 179 x 224 / 10268 Bytes

2025-12-07 179 x 224 / 10720 Bytes

2025-12-07 224 x 224 / 9564 Bytes

Netanyahu Declares He Won’t Quit Politics Even If Granted Pardon

In a bold and unsettling statement that rattled Israeli politics and sent ripples across the Middle East, former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on May 8 2023 that he would not abandon his political career even if he were to receive a pardon for the corruption convictions that have plagued him for more than a decade. The pronouncement, delivered during a televised press conference in Jerusalem, struck at the heart of a nation still reeling from the dramatic saga of the world’s longest‑serving head of state facing the possibility of incarceration.

The Legal Backdrop: A Decade‑Long Court Battle

Netanyahu’s legal woes began in 2019 when Israeli prosecutors, working with the Anti‑Corruption Bureau, indicted him on 30 separate charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. He had already been convicted in 2018 on lesser counts that carried prison terms and a permanent ban from public office. The case that made headlines was Kashani, where the Supreme Court found him guilty of accepting bribes in the form of a luxury watch and a villa from business magnate Eyal Kashani. In 2020, Netanyahu was also found guilty in the Saban case—convicted for receiving gifts from a foreign businessman.

During his final tenure as prime minister (2019‑2021), the court’s proceedings ran in parallel with his public duties. In January 2023, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled that, under Article 75 of the Israeli Constitution, a pardon is permissible for a convicted public official, a landmark decision that effectively cleared the path for a presidential pardon. President Isaac Herzog, who took office in July 2021, had already been urged by his political allies and the Likud party to consider a pardon for Netanyahu. The court’s decision, coupled with Herzog’s longstanding support for Netanyahu’s continued political relevance, set the stage for the unprecedented possibility that the former prime minister might return to the political arena unencumbered by criminal convictions.

Netanyahu’s Statement: A Political Survival Strategy

In the press conference, Netanyahu’s tone was resolute and unapologetic. “If I receive the pardon, it will be a vindication of the truth,” he told the assembled reporters, “but it will not change my commitment to serve the state of Israel. I have never given up on politics, and I will not do so because of a pardon or otherwise.” He emphasized that the decision to stay in politics was not a matter of personal ambition alone, but a reflection of his belief that his experience and leadership were essential to Israel’s future. Netanyahu further added that the likelihood of a pardon would only reinforce his resolve to continue shaping the country’s political landscape.

The statement was delivered at a time when the political climate in Israel was in a state of flux. The Likud party, historically the dominant force in Israeli politics and Netanyahu’s political home, was grappling with internal divisions over the question of the former prime minister’s future. Several senior party members, including party co‑chairman Kobi Shabtai, had publicly suggested that Netanyahu’s presence could jeopardise the likelihood of forming a stable coalition government. Netanyahu’s pledge to stay on therefore signaled to his supporters that he remained a central figure in Likud’s political calculus.

Reactions Across the Spectrum

Supporters: The Likud caucus largely responded with cheers. Netanyahu’s senior aides, as well as his former cabinet ministers, expressed confidence that his presence would rally voters and consolidate the right‑wing bloc in an upcoming parliamentary election scheduled for November 2023. Many of his supporters pointed out that a pardon would remove the legal obstacles that have previously kept him from holding a ministerial portfolio.

Opposition: The opposition parties, particularly the joint Blue‑White alliance and Yesh Atid, issued statements condemning Netanyahu’s stance. “Netanyahu’s refusal to step down in the face of a pardon is an insult to the rule of law,” said Blue‑White leader Yair Ben‑Gvir. “If a pardon is handed to him, it will represent a victory for corruption and undermine democratic institutions.”

Legal Analysts: Legal scholars and former judges weighed in on the implications of a pardon for the integrity of Israeli law. According to Dr. Orly Gazit, a professor of constitutional law at Tel Aviv University, “A pardon may clear the criminal record, but it does not erase the impact on public trust or the precedent it sets for future political leaders who might evade accountability.”

Public Opinion: Opinion polls published by the Israel Democracy Institute revealed a divided populace. Roughly 42 % of respondents expressed a “neutral” stance toward Netanyahu’s continued political role if pardoned, whereas 25 % were strongly opposed, and 33 % favored his retention, citing his security credentials. A surge of protests outside the Knesset on the day of the announcement further underscored the polarized public sentiment.

The President’s Pardon: A Conditional Offer

While the Supreme Court’s decision paved the way for a pardon, the final decision rested with President Herzog. In a separate address on March 28 2023, Herzog stated that he would “consult with the relevant ministries and experts before making any official decision.” The President’s comments underscored the delicate balancing act between upholding the law and maintaining political stability. Herzog’s support for a pardon was viewed by many as a political gesture aligning with Likud’s interests, prompting concerns about presidential independence.

In a footnote to the original article, The Print included a link to a Guardian piece that detailed Herzog’s past statements, offering context to his willingness to consider a pardon. That reference highlighted Herzog’s close friendship with Netanyahu since the 1970s and his own political background in the Labor Party, which further complicated the public’s perception of the decision.

What Comes Next?

If the pardon is granted, the immediate question will be whether Netanyahu will be reinstated as a minister, the leader of a coalition, or simply remain a parliamentary figure. His statement indicates that he will pursue a return to the political arena regardless of the legal status. Meanwhile, Likud’s internal polls suggest that the party might rally around Netanyahu to bolster its prospects in the forthcoming elections, which many analysts predict will become a multi‑party showdown.

For the Israeli public and the international community, the situation remains a litmus test of the country’s democratic resilience. The decision to pardon or not pardon a former prime minister who has been convicted of serious corruption offenses could either reaffirm or undermine the rule of law in Israel. As the story unfolds, all eyes will be on President Herzog, the Israeli Supreme Court, and the Likud leadership to see whether Netanyahu’s words translate into action.

In Summary

Benjamin Netanyahu’s assertion that he will not step away from politics even if he receives a pardon encapsulates a pivotal moment in Israeli politics. The statement, delivered against a backdrop of longstanding legal battles and the Supreme Court’s facilitation of a pardon, signals that Netanyahu remains determined to influence Israel’s future. The reactions—from supportive party members to vehement opposition, from legal experts to ordinary citizens—highlight the deep divisions within Israeli society. Whether the pardon will ultimately be granted remains unclear, but the mere possibility has already reshaped political calculations, underscored the fragile balance between law and politics, and raised questions about the future trajectory of Israel’s democracy.