ISRAEL’S ATTORNEY general announced yesterday that former president Moshe Katsav will be brought to trial for alleged sexual offences, including rape.
The indictment will include counts of forceful indecent acts, obstruction of justice, and various sexual harassment charges pertaining to a number of women who worked alongside Mr Katsav over the years.
However, attention will focus on the rape charge involving a woman identified as “A” who worked at the tourism ministry when Mr Katsav was the minister.
The allegations first came to light 2½ years ago when Mr Katsav complained to the attorney general that he was being blackmailed by a woman, a former employee, who alleged she had been sexually assaulted by him.
Other women came forward with similar allegations against Mr Katsav and he eventually resigned as president in June 2007.
The case has had many twists and turns, with Mr Katsav maintaining his innocence throughout, claiming he was the victim of a political witchhunt.
In a dramatic live news conference in January 2007, Mr Katsav emotionally slammed the political, judicial and law enforcement echelons.
He said they were “leading a brainwashing campaign” against him, but his bitterest attacks were aimed at the Israeli media.
Last year his lawyers cancelled a plea bargain agreement that would have required Mr Katsav to admit to lesser charges of sexual misconduct but avoid the possibility of a 20-year jail term.
Israel is now gearing up for a high-profile trial with sordid sexual details being revealed in what may turn out to be a courtroom drama of the highest order.
Justice ministry sources said attorney general Menahem Mazuz took the decision to indict, believing there was sufficient evidence to press charges.
In response, Avi Lavie, a lawyer representing Mr Katsav, said the decision was “based on emotion and not facts”, vowing that his client would prove his innocence in court.
Women’s organisations in Israel welcomed the attorney general’s decision, noting that it came on International Womens’ Day, saying it will encourage other victims of sexual assault to come forward and not remain silent.
However, a guilty verdict is far from a foregone conclusion.
In the period before the plea bargain was cancelled, state prosecutors admitted to what was termed the “problematic nature” and “inconsistencies” of the testimony of “A”, and this will undoubtedly be raised by the defence team in court.