Did the trial of Israel's ex-Prime Minister change the course of history?

Olmert's case is one of several similar inquiries that have caused Israelis to question the trustworthiness of their government leaders in recent years. Olmert suggested that this case may have impacted discussions his government was having with the Palestinians. 

Gali Tibbon/AP
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert speaks to the media at Jerusalem's District Court following a verdict hearing in his trial Tuesday, July 10. An Israeli court on Tuesday cleared Olmert of the major charges in a corruption trial that forced him from power. Olmert was found guilty of a lesser offense, and it was not clear whether that verdict could send him to jail.

An Israeli court on Tuesday cleared former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of the most serious corruption charges against him, including fraud, concealing cash gifts and double billing, but convicted him on a lesser count of breach of trust.

The split decision capped a five-year corruption inquiry that drove Olmert from office in 2009 and helped usher in the right-wing government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

It is not the end to Olmert’s legal problems. He still faces a bribery trial involving a controversial Jerusalem real estate development built while he was mayor of the city.

But Tuesday’s verdict was widely seen as a significant vindication for the former Kadima Party chairman, who had always insisted he was the innocent victim of a political witch hunt and that any improprieties or illegal activities were either fabricated or the result of mismanagement and disorganization in his office.

“I never defrauded anyone,” an emotional Olmert told reporters outside the Jerusalem courtroom. “There was no corruption.”

Nevertheless Olmert, 66, becomes the highest-ranking political figure in Israel’s history to be convicted of criminal activity.

Sentencing will be announced in September. Olmert still could face three years in prison for the breach-of-trust conviction, legal experts said, though his attorneys predicted the former leader would avoid any jail time.

His case is one of a several corruption and misconduct inquiries that have shattered Israelis’ faith in their government leaders in recent years.

Last year, former Israeli President Moshe Katsav was convicted of rape and is serving a seven-year jail sentence. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is facing possible indictment over allegations of bribery and influence peddling, though formal charges have not been filed.

Michael Partem, an attorney who campaigns against corruption, said neither side in the Olmert case should be celebrating the court’s decision.

“It’s not a victory for anybody,” said Partem, vice chairman of the Jerusalem-based watchdog group Movement for Quality Government in Israel.

He predicted the case would further erode Israelis’ confidence in government institutions. “Even before this case, Israelis has a very jaded view of their elected officials.”

But Partem said he hoped that prosecutors and courts would remain vigilant and aggressive in tackling government corruption, even as some Olmert supporters advocated firing or reining in the state’s prosecutor in light of the acquittal on the most serious charges in the case.

The original 61-page indictment against Olmert accused him accepting cash-stuffed envelopes from American businessman Morris Talansky, double billing for travel expenses abroad and steering government contracts and grants to supporters. The allegations, involving several hundred thousand dollars, centered on Olmert’sterms as Jerusalem mayor and trade minister, but they surfaced after he had been elected prime minister in 2006.

He could have faced five years in prison if convicted of the more serious charges.

In the end, the court ruled that Olmert was guilty only of trying to grant favors to a friend and former law associate while serving as Israel’s trade minister, which the court ruled was a conflict of interest. Judges said there was insufficient evidence to convict on the other charges.

Some believe the prosecution against Olmert may have changed the face of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because his government was actively involved in peace talks. Olmert has since said that he offered to make significant concessions toward creating a Palestinian state. Talks collapsed at the end of 2008 as Olmert’s administration began to crumble and never fully resumed under Netanyahu.

Palestinian leaders have said that a deal was not as close as Olmert has portrayed. But the former prime minister hinted Tuesday that the corruption case against him may have changed the course of history.

“The far-reaching implications of the decision to put me on trial, both inside and outside of Israel, cannot be overlooked,” he said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.