Barak-Erez Temporarily Halted the Transfer of the Former Military Advocate General’s Case to Isman
Israeli Supreme Court Justice Daphne Barak-Erez temporarily halted the transfer of the case involving former Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi to State Attorney Amit Isman. The order remains in effect until a further decision and does not indicate that the justice accepted the request for an additional hearing in the case.
Key facts
- •Court: Supreme Court of Israel — High Court of Justice
- •Justice: Daphne Barak-Erez
- •Petitioners: Avichai Boaron, “Choosing Life,” and “Lavi”
- •Recipient of the case: State Attorney Amit Isman
- •Duration of the order: Until a further court decision
- •The case number and exact date of the decision are not specified in the source
Why the Dispute Arose
The case concerns the investigation into the leak to the media of security-camera footage from the Sde Teiman facility, as well as suspicions of submitting a false statement to the High Court of Justice and concealing the circumstances surrounding the examination of the leak. The investigation concerned, among others, former Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi and additional officers in the Military Advocate General’s Corps. In October 2025, Tomer-Yerushalmi informed the Chief of the General Staff that she had authorized the transfer of the materials to the media and that she accepted responsibility for doing so, after which she left her position.
Who Opposed the Transfer of the Case
The original petitioners were Knesset member Avichai Boaron, the public organization “Choosing Life,” and the Lavi organization. They opposed transferring the materials to Amit Isman, arguing that neither the State Attorney’s Office nor the State Attorney himself should handle this case. The petitioners sought the appointment of an external official to oversee the investigation.
Previous Decisions
In November 2025, the High Court of Justice ruled that, under the circumstances that had arisen, oversight of the investigation could not be transferred to the heads of the government legal system or to the State Attorney’s Office, and permitted the appointment of an external oversight official. In March 2026, the legal adviser to the Ministry of Justice, Yael Kotik, decided that the results of the investigation allowed the materials to be transferred to the State Attorney. Under her decision, Isman or a person appointed by him was to decide whether to file indictments and to conduct the proceedings if indictments were filed.
What Barak-Erez Decided
About two weeks before the temporary order, the High Court of Justice dismissed the petition, ruling that there were no grounds to intervene in the transfer of the case to Isman: the police investigation had uncovered no information indicating his material involvement in the events. The petitioners subsequently requested an additional hearing on the decision. After receiving the request, Barak-Erez halted the transfer of the case to Isman, “solely as a precaution,” until a further decision, while separately emphasizing that at this stage she was expressing no view on the merits of the request.
What this means for you
The materials will not be transferred to the State Attorney at this stage, pending a further court decision. This is a procedural precaution, not a final recognition that a conflict of interest exists or a determination regarding the guilt of any person. For ordinary citizens, this illustrates that filing a request for an additional hearing may sometimes be accompanied by the temporary preservation of the status quo, but does not predetermine the outcome of the dispute.
Find a lawyer for this topic
- Lawyers: Общая практика
- Lawyers in Тель-Авив
- Lawyers in Иерусалим
- Lawyers in Хайфа
- Lawyers in Ришон ле-Цион