With word going out that Attorney General Avihai Mandelblit will soon be announcing his decision regarding possibly indicting PM Benjamin Netanyahu, even before the upcoming elections, Netanyahu and his people are going on a full-scale offensive against Mandelblit and a possible announcement.

Netanyahu attack is based on his idea that this is tampering with the elections and democracy and is unfairly going to influence voters. Netanyahu says any decision should only be announced after the election, not before.

All information about public officials, and those wanting to become public officials, competing in elections, is relevant to the voters and should be disclosed. Not disclosing information to the public is as much influencing the voters and disclosing information is. Voters have a right to know.

Even more than that - Netanyahu called for early elections in the shadow of a possible indictment hanging over his head. His expectation was to use the possible indictment, with the current police recommendations for one, as a mandate from the public to rule despite the recommendations against him. This seems to be a cynical exploitation of the public. Netanyahu wanted the benefits of the police recommendations to indict, but not the detriments - the actual indictment.

A theory that came to me is that Netanyahu's goal in calling elections was to delay an indictment. Meaning, Netanyahu knew that the walls were closing in and an indictment was due soon. By calling for elections, he thought he could perhaps pressure Mandelblit to delay the indictment, as it would be "interference" in democratic elections in some way.. Mandelblit seems to be a straight shooter, and does not care about these games - it seems he does what his job requires him to do, and Netanyahu also now sees that.

Walla News starts off an oped today with a question. The author ask, is the Attorney General, Avihai Mandelblit, cut from the right cloth? does he have the courage to do what is necessary - i.e. order an indictment against Netanyahu?

I don't like such questions. Such questions presupposes a predetermined conclusion. The question presupposes that Netanyahu is definitely guilty and should be indicted, and if Mandelblit comes decides to not indict it is not because he felt there was not enough evidence or there is no case for whatever reason. Rather, the question presupposes, Mandelblit was afraid. He could not stand up and indict Netanyahu. He could not do what is right. He is a weak man.

The question does not give Mandelblit any room to decide for himself what the appropriate steps are and how to proceed. He is either a worthy Attorney General (by indicting) or he is not.

Sorry, but that is not how the justice system works. I do not know if Mandelblit is courageous or not. I do not know if Netanyahu is guilty or not. I do not know if Mandelblit will do what is right or not. I do know that we cannot assume a conclusion and then demand that Mandelblit act according to our conclusions, and any other decision makes him a chickensh*t, as Obama called Netanyahu.

I can see two courageous moves for Mandelblit.
1. If Mandelblit feels Netanyahu is guilty and should be indicted but comes under heavy pressure from Netanyahu's people, but he indicts anyway.
2. If Mandelblit feel Netanyahu is innocent or there is not enough evidence so he decides to not indict, depite the heavy pressure from the leftist protesters and from much of the media.

Mandeblit can be courageous. Mandelblit can be cut from the right cloth, but not necessarily by indicting Netanayahu. If Mandelblit has the strength to make the decision he feels to be correct, despite the heavy pressures against him from either side, he will have shown himself to be cut form the right cloth.

Attorney General Avihai Mandelblit has published his official opinion that the Mikva Law being pushed by MK Moshe Gafni is unconstitutional (even though we have no constitution), as it harms people's personal rights to freedom of religious worship.
source: Kooker, among others

I find it very interesting that it is specifically Avihai Mandelblit, the new State Attorney General who is himself a frum (Haredi, even) Jew, is the one person in the entire government that is bold enough to stand up and tell Gafni that he cannot do something.

Everybody else is worried about coalition stability and politics, and Mandelblit is the one guy saying no, and it is on a religious issue that one would think would be close to his heart and he would be pretty close to Gafni in his opinion of the matter.

I am not accusing Mandelblit of being an "Uncle Tom" or having the need to prove himself as not biased towards Haredi interests, as people worry will happen whenever a Jews runs for office in the United States. Mandelblit seems like a good, honest guy serving with integrity and I am sure he truly finds the current proposal to be bad and has the strength to stand up to it where nobody else does due to personal interests.

Recently Rosh Chodesh at the Kotel has been relatively quiet. Most of the fighting between the Haredi worshipers and the Women of the Wall worshipers seems to have stopped.

It seems this quiet might now get some sort of "permanent" status.

Avihai Mandelblit, the cabinet secretary and incoming Attorney General, had been tasked with negotiating between the groups and coming up with a solution. Mandelblit has announced that an agreement has been reached, and the agreement will be set in law.

According to Mandelblit, the Women of the Wall (and Reform) will stop using the Kotel area and will only daven in the area of Robinson's Arch, and they will have there a sefer Torah. However, they will not perform weddings or circumcision ceremonies in the area of Robinson's Arch, and will not play music on Shabbos or holidays. As well, no signs will be installed directing people to that area.
source: Kikar and NRG

I am happy they were able to come to an agreement and avoid further fighting. If they are all happy, it sounds good to me, though I don't really get how this is significantly different than the previous arrangement.