Power Struggle at the Top of Israel’s Legal System Intensifies Over the Leak Investigation

Legal advisor to the Government and Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara announced on Thursday evening that she is withdrawing from further involvement in the investigation into the leak of the video filmed at Sde Teiman (the “Yemen Field” facility). The decision follows an internal legal opinion stating that the Attorney General faces a potential conflict of interest in the case.

However, in a sharply worded letter to Justice Minister Yariv Levin, Baharav-Miara accused him of exceeding his authority by announcing the appointment of Retired Judge (and current Ombudsman for Judges) David Kola to oversee the investigation, calling the move “an improper intervention in a criminal proceeding.”

Levin responded that he “completely rejects” her position.

Attempt to Circumvent the High Court

In her letter, Baharav-Miara referred to public statements by MK Moshe Saada, who had suggested that whomever replaced her might interrogate her under caution. She described these remarks as part of an effort to pressure her removal and to bypass an interim injunction issued by the High Court regarding government attempts to alter the powers of the Attorney General.

Baharav-Miara wrote that the minister’s move constitutes:

“a circumvention of the basic rules governing who may exercise criminal prosecutorial powers in Israel.”

She added that Judge Kola is legally prohibited from taking on additional public roles while serving as the Ombudsman for Judges, a restriction designed to preserve neutrality and separation of powers.

Conflict of Interest Opinion Issued Earlier Today

The decision by Baharav-Miara to step back came after Yael Kotik, Legal Adviser to the Ministry of Justice, advised that the Attorney General has a conflict of interest in this case and should not be involved in directing the criminal investigation.

Baharav-Miara told the High Court that, in light of the new opinion, she is no longer handling the case.
However, in her letter to Levin she clarified that the Justice Ministry’s opinion was issued “without necessary factual verification”, arguing that key assumptions in the document were incorrect.

She stated that the State Attorney’s Office will continue to handle the investigation, and that only individual officials with conflicts will be recused as necessary.

Dispute Over Appointment Procedure

Levin announced earlier this week that he intends to transfer oversight of the case to a figure outside the Attorney General’s Office, and named Judge Kola as his candidate. Kola later stated that he would act solely in accordance with the High Court’s instructions.

However, the Justice Ministry noted that the legal clause Levin cited requires prior consultation with the Civil Service Commissioner.
The Commissioner has stated in writing that no such consultation took place—directly contradicting the minister’s claim.