Introduction
The investigations into the conduct of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have led to a number of constitutional dilemmas regarding the next steps that should be taken if there is an indictment. Many of the questions that have arisen during these investigations are due to the unprecedented prospect of a current prime minister under indictment and the lack of a recognized law on this matter. No matter the outcome, Israel's political and legal community should seize the moment and contemplate legislation to regulate this, so that the system is ready for possible future recurrences of a prime minister under investigation.
The following guide represents the collective wisdom of the Israel Democracy Institute's scholars and explains the various possibilities and scenarios as Israel enters uncharted political and legal waters.
Q. Is the Attorney-General obliged to announce whether he intends to indict the Prime Minister (pending a hearing) before the elections take place?
A. If the attorney-general is able to complete his examination of the cases in a reasonable time period ahead of the elections (several weeks), most legal experts argue that he is obligated to announce his decision because of the public's right to know. They argue that the same considerations that led the police to announce both the launch of the investigation and its results, should apply to the attorney-general's decision. Other legal experts are of the opinion that at this point, with elections weeks away, it would be best for the attorney-general to hold off on his decision, so as not to provide a sway over the public's vote. Even if a decision is announced after the election, it would be susceptible to criticism that the attorney-general was seeking to overturn the will of the voters through legal means.








