By: Fern Sidman

A growing number of Likud cabinet and deputy ministers have called on Israeli President Isaac Herzog to issue a presidential pardon for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, arguing that the premier’s ongoing corruption trial has become a “bleeding wound” in Israeli society and a barrier to national unity. The extraordinary appeal, reported by VIN News on Wednesday, was formalized in a letter dated October 19, spearheaded by Environmental Protection Minister Idit Silman and signed by a wide array of Likud officials.

The letter’s release marks a significant escalation in political efforts to bring Netanyahu’s years-long legal saga to a close — a move given renewed impetus following President Donald Trump’s call last week from the Knesset floor for Herzog to pardon the embattled leader.

“Unfortunately, today it is already clear to everyone that as long as his trial is underway, which is like a bleeding wound in the body of Israeli society, there will be no unity in Israel,” the letter reads, according to the report at VIN News, which obtained excerpts of the statement.

The ministers argue that Netanyahu’s continued prosecution — on charges of fraud, bribery, and breach of trust — has deepened political rifts at a time when Israel faces multiple internal and external challenges. They frame the trial as not only a legal proceeding but a national crisis that has “crippled the ability of the country to heal after years of division.”

“It is time,” the letter continues, “to put an end to this destructive process and allow Israel to move forward.”

Environmental Protection Minister Silman, who took the lead in organizing the letter, posted it publicly on X (formerly Twitter), calling on President Herzog to “exercise his moral and constitutional responsibility” by granting Netanyahu a pardon “for the sake of Israel’s cohesion.”

The appeal carries symbolic weight: it is rare, even in Israel’s turbulent political culture, for sitting ministers to collectively petition the head of state to intervene in an active criminal case involving a sitting prime minister.

The ministers’ move follows the dramatic intervention of President Trump, who during his October 13 Knesset address made a direct appeal to Herzog, who was in attendance. “Hey, I have an idea,” Trump said to applause and laughter from Likud benches. “Mr. President, why don’t you give him a pardon?”

As reported by VIN News, Trump’s remarks were characteristically blunt — dismissing the charges against Netanyahu as trivial. “Cigars and some champagne — who the hell cares?” he quipped, referring to Case 1000, one of several criminal files in which Netanyahu is accused of accepting luxury gifts from wealthy businessmen James Packer of Australia and Arnon Milchan of Israel.

Netanyahu, 76, has denied all wrongdoing, insisting that the gifts were tokens of friendship and not bribes.

Trump’s comments at the Knesset were not his first time weighing in on Netanyahu’s legal troubles. In June, the president took to Truth Social, blasting what he called a “ridiculous Witch Hunt against their Great War Time Prime Minister.” He wrote: “I was shocked to hear that the State of Israel, which has just had one of its Greatest Moments in History, and is strongly led by Bibi Netanyahu, is continuing its ridiculous Witch Hunt against their Great War Time Prime Minister! This travesty of ‘justice’ cannot be allowed.”

Trump concluded that post with a characteristic flourish: “It was the United States of America that saved Israel, and now it is going to be the United States of America that saves Bibi Netanyahu.”

His latest call from the Knesset podium has now been echoed — formally and politically — by members of Netanyahu’s own party, setting the stage for a new constitutional and moral debate over the limits of presidential clemency in Israel’s parliamentary system.

As the VIN News report noted, the Israeli Basic Law gives the president authority to pardon convicted offenders and commute sentences, but the question of whether that power extends to ongoing trials — especially one involving a sitting prime minister — remains legally ambiguous.

Constitutional scholars have long debated whether such a move would violate the principle of judicial independence. Professor Amnon Rubinstein, one of Israel’s foremost legal experts, told VIN News that while a president may grant clemency “in extraordinary circumstances,” doing so before a verdict “could set a dangerous precedent” and undermine public trust in the rule of law.

Opposition figures have already accused Likud ministers of attempting to “politicize justice.” Leaders in Yesh Atid and Labor warned that the letter represents an attempt to erode the separation of powers and shield Netanyahu from accountability.

Yet among Netanyahu’s allies, the sentiment is one of weary resignation — that the trial, now entering its fifth year, has become less about justice and more about politics. “This case has paralyzed our democracy,” one Likud minister told VIN News anonymously. “It is time for the president to act as a unifier, not as a bystander.”

The prime minister’s legal woes stem from three separate cases collectively known in Israel as Cases 1000, 2000, and 4000.

Case 1000 alleges that Netanyahu received lavish gifts — cigars, champagne, and jewelry — worth roughly 700,000 shekels (about $190,000) from Packer and Milchan in exchange for political favors.

Case 2000 accuses Netanyahu of negotiating favorable coverage with Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon Mozes in return for legislative help against a rival newspaper.

Case 4000, the most serious, involves allegations that Netanyahu promoted regulatory benefits for Bezeq Telecom owner Shaul Elovitch in exchange for positive coverage on the company’s news site, Walla!

Netanyahu has denied all charges, claiming they are part of a politically motivated campaign by the Israeli left and media elites to force him out of office.

As VIN News has frequently reported, the cases have deeply divided Israeli society, fueling years of protests, counter-protests, and bitter legal commentary. Critics see them as proof that no one is above the law; supporters view them as proof that Israel’s judiciary is waging a vendetta against an elected leader.

For President Isaac Herzog, the letter presents a profound constitutional and moral challenge. As a figure who has repeatedly called for national unity, Herzog must now weigh whether granting clemency would heal or further polarize the country.

The president’s office has not commented publicly on the ministers’ letter. However, aides close to Herzog told VIN News that he views his constitutional role as “a guardian of democratic institutions, not an arbiter of political grievances.”

Still, Herzog has in the past expressed concern about the “erosion of public confidence” in Israel’s judicial process. In private meetings, he is said to have lamented that the trial has become “a mirror of our division.”

If Herzog were to issue a pardon, it would be the most consequential act of presidential clemency in Israeli history.

For Netanyahu, the timing of this latest show of loyalty could prove politically advantageous. It reinforces his image as a leader unfairly persecuted for his success — particularly in the wake of Israel’s security challenges and ongoing postwar reconstruction in Gaza.

As the VIN News report observed, Trump’s intervention has re-energized Netanyahu’s base, which views him as Israel’s indispensable wartime prime minister. Trump’s Knesset appearance, coupled with his fiery social media defense, has revived calls within Likud to “end the witch hunt once and for all.”

Whether Herzog will heed those calls remains uncertain. Legal scholars warn that granting a pardon mid-trial would provoke a constitutional crisis, while political analysts predict it would deepen the ideological fault lines already fracturing Israeli politics.

Still, to Netanyahu’s supporters — and to the Likud ministers now pressing the president for action — the matter is simple. As one signer of the letter told VIN News, “Israel needs Bibi focused on leading, not on defending himself in court. History will not forgive us if we fail to act.”