Chief prosecutor Amit Aisman cleared to oversee Sde Teiman leak investigation, High Court rules

Chief prosecutor Amit Aisman has been cleared to oversee the investigation into the leak of controversial footage from the Sde Teiman military detention facility, according to a ruling by the High Court of Justice. The decision, issued on Wednesday, allows Aisman and his prosecution team to proceed with reviewing the full police file, determining whether further investigation is necessary, and deciding whether charges should be filed. This follows a prolonged legal battle involving multiple stakeholders, including the Justice Ministry, bereaved families' organizations, and the current administration. The investigation centers on footage broadcast in August 2024 that appeared to show IDF reservists abusing a Palestinian detainee at Sde Teiman. The video, which sparked international outrage, was later revealed to have originated from former military advocate-general Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, who admitted in October 2025 to authorizing its release. The leak was reportedly intended to bolster the credibility of the investigation into the alleged abuse. The case has drawn intense scrutiny, with calls for accountability from both domestic and international observers. The High Court’s 2-1 ruling dismissed efforts by bereaved-families organization Bacharnu B’Haim and two bereaved fathers to block Aisman from leading the probe. These groups had sought to exclude the state prosecutors, arguing that the case should be supervised by an independent entity. Their petition aimed to delay the involvement of the prosecution and allow Justice Minister Yariv Levin more time to appoint an external supervisor. However, the court found no grounds to overturn the updated opinion by Justice Ministry legal adviser Yael Kotik, which determined that Aisman was no longer barred from participating in the criminal case. The dispute over legal oversight has been deeply entangled with broader tensions between the Justice Ministry and the State Attorney’s Office. Initially, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and other senior officials were excluded from the case due to potential testimony obligations related to an earlier examination. Despite police concluding that Baharav-Miara had no involvement in the affair, Levin accused her of having a conflict of interest, citing her role in overseeing an internal probe that recommended against pursuing criminal charges. That probe was led by Tomer-Yerushalmi, who later admitted to leaking the video. The investigation, which has spanned nearly two years, has faced numerous challenges. Police reported in February that their investigative work had been completed, though the court assumed for procedural reasons that the formal conclusion had not yet occurred. Investigators conducted extensive interviews, searched premises, and arrested two suspects while placing five others under caution. The process included meetings with key figures such as the head of the police Investigations and Intelligence Division, culminating in Kotik’s updated opinion on March 8. She concluded that Aisman had not participated in the events under review and would not need to testify, despite his attendance at a January 2025 meeting. Following this, the materials were transferred to Aisman, who assembled a prosecution team comprising two of his deputies to evaluate the file and assess whether further action was warranted. The team will now determine whether to file charges against individuals implicated in the leak and subsequent cover-up, potentially including Tomer-Yerushalmi and other senior military prosecutors. The outcome of this determination will likely shape the trajectory of the case moving forward. Meanwhile, the situation reflects deeper institutional conflicts within Israel’s judicial system. Justice Minister Levin has struggled to appoint an independent supervisor for the case, with two previous candidates, Judicial Complaints Commissioner Asher Kula and retired judge Yosef Ben-Hamo, being rejected for failing to meet eligibility criteria. After Ben-Hamo’s appointment was invalidated, Levin failed to secure a replacement or request the court to intervene. As a result, the investigation has proceeded under the supervision of senior police authorities, highlighting the complexities of maintaining impartiality in high-profile cases.