High-profile case8/30/2026

Supreme Court President Urged Zini to Reconsider Request to Disclose Names

Supreme Court President Yitzhak Amit suggested that Shin Bet Director David Zini reconsider his request to disclose the names of 67 former agency employees. They are participating in a petition against Zini's appointment but provided only their initials.

Key facts

•Court: High Court of Justice at the Supreme Court of Israel
•Publication date: August 30, 2026
•Petitioners: 3 former Shin Bet directors and 186 former Shin Bet employees
•119 petitioners provided their names in an envelope
•67 petitioners remained identified by their initials
•The case number is not stated in the source

Who Filed the Petition

Three former Shin Bet directors—Carmi Gillon, Ami Ayalon, and Nadav Argaman—filed a petition with the High Court of Justice against the appointment of David Zini, together with 186 former agency employees. Initially, no list of those employees' names was submitted, and they were identified by their initials.

Why a Separate Dispute Arose

After the list was not provided, Zini filed a motion with the High Court of Justice to initiate contempt-of-court proceedings. Subsequently, 119 of the petitioners disclosed their names, which were delivered to Zini in an envelope. The remaining 67 refused to provide their full names and continued to appear under their initials.

The Court President's Position

During the hearing on the motion, Yitzhak Amit said that he expected the Shin Bet director to reconsider his position. The material does not indicate that the court has already ruled on either the motion to initiate contempt-of-court proceedings or the petition itself against Zini's appointment.

What this means for you

The Court President's remarks do not in themselves constitute a final ruling, nor do they establish a general right for parties to proceedings to conceal their names. For people in a similar position, the material indicates that the confidentiality of petitioners' identities may become a separate subject of litigation, but the source does not state its outcome.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings