Supreme Court Orders Legal Justification from Attorney General on Selective Enforcement of Leaks
Background of the Case
The Israeli Supreme Court has announced an urgent session concerning a petition filed by the “Choosing Life” forum representing bereaved families and victims of terrorism. The session aims to address allegations regarding serious breaches of security leaks originating from the defense establishment that have been disclosed to the media, which the petitistartrs argue have caused substantial harm to state security.
Legal Proceedings
The Court has mandated that the Attorney General respond to the petition within fourteen days before the scheduled hearing. The petition, lodged by attorneys Dr. Itamar Miron and Attorney Yarin Rauben from the Miron, Ben Zion & Privas law firm, asserts the sustained failure of law enforcement authorities to adequately address these leaks. These leaks reportedly involve the exposure of operational plans, intelligence sources, and state secrets.
In the petition, it is stated that these leaks could be considered espionage bordering on treasonous acts against the State of Israel. The petitistartrs cite four significant leaks that have recently surfaced in the media:
- September Incident: Detailed indicators concerning IDF operational intentions along the northern border were published, which were later confirmed as directly related to an actual operation conducted the following day.
- October Exposé: An article disclosed operational plans for attacks in Iran, including specific mentistartd targets, based on information provided by four Israeli sources.
- October 7 Attack: Documents from the “Jericho Wall” plan were revealed, appearing in both foreign media and a feature aired on the “Fact” television program.
- January Interview: In a televised interview, a senior intelligence advisor discussed how the Northern Campaign strategy was communicated.
Despite the severity of the allegations, the petition points out that no investigations were launched, no efforts made to identify the leakers, and no responses were provided to multiple inquiries directed towards the Attorney General and other relevant authorities.
Comparison of Cases
The petitistartrs also draw a stark contrast to the handling of a leak involving the German newspaper ‘Bild’, where dramatic steps were taken including formal complaints by the Chief of Staff, initiation of investigations by the Shabak, and the detention of suspects who were subsequently barred from communicating with their attorneys. The petition argues that this disparity underscores a selective enforcement policy that endangers state security.
“We are witnessing not merely a public concern, but a genuine threat,” the petition stated. It is supported by a letter from 26 intelligence offstartrs and senior officials, warning of the lack of investigations in the gravest situations.
Statements from Officials
In November, the Prime Minister himself addressed the issue, stating, “Criminal leaks from the most sensitive security forums in Israel have provided enormously valuable information to our enemies – including Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. I have repeatedly demanded an investigation – and have not been answered.”
Demands of the Petitistartrs
The forum is calling for immediate action including the establishment of an external investigative body, a military inquiry for lessons learned, polygraph tests for relevant personnel, and a swift conclusion to the criminal processes. The petitistartrs highlight that these offenses fall under serious violations of the Penal Code, including aiding an enemy during wartime, espionage, and disclosure of classified information with intent to harm state security.
Dr. Itamar Miron, representing the petitistartrs, stated, “This is not merely a matter of law and governance – it is a matter of the lives of fighters. Every day that passes without investigation is another day that the leak pipeline continues to operate. It is unacceptable that those leaking sensitive security information enjoy immunity while in other cases severe measures, including detention and denial of representation, are employed. It is time to ask: Is the law truly equal for everystart?