Yonatan Urich, an advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and one of the main suspects in the “Qatargate” investigations, will remain under restrictive measures until early November, Lod District Court Judge Amit Michles announced in a Thursday decision.
This follows a Wednesday hearing, during which Michles pressed police representatives for a clear explanation as to why he should extend the measures, while Urich’s defense stood on inconsistencies in the police’s narrative.
Last week, Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court ordered that the restrictions be lifted; the police then appealed to the District Court. Urich’s team could accept the decision, or appeal it to the Supreme Court.
This is not the first time this order of operations has taken place since Urich was arrested in March, along with fellow suspect and acquaintance Eli Feldstein, who is a former military spokesman at the Prime Minister’s Office. Urich’s team has argued that the police’s narrative is inconsistent and that the treatment by the justice system of Urich is unwarranted, while police have countered with what it said is proof of grave actions against state security.
The investigation concerns alleged Qatari influences over figures close to the prime minister, people who operated public relations campaigns for the Gulf state while working in close proximity to major Israeli decision makers.
Allegedly, this revolved around the 2022 World Cup which took place in Qatar, a campaign to warm up the Israeli public to a state that has sponsored the terrorist group - Hamas - which has sworn to destroy the Jewish State.
Per reports, streams of funds through third parties made this possible, but the stakes in the operations rose when Hamas launched the October 7 cross-border massacre attack, the war broke out in Gaza, and Qatar became one of the main negotiators for ceasefire talks.
'Leaked documents affair'
Investigations against Feldstein by police and the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) initiated in November 2024. In the “Bild” case, Urich allegedly orchestrated - while Feldstein executed - the illegal leaking of a classified document from the IDF reflecting Hamas's impressions of the successes of its efforts to rattle the Israeli public, specifically when it came to hostage talks.
Feldstein allegedly leaked the document to the German tabloid Bild, after permission for its publication was denied by the military censor.
The documents were eventually published, allegedly to sway public opinion on the hostage negotiations. This was around August 2024, when six hostages were killed by their Hamas captors in a tunnel in Rafah: Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Almog Sarusi, Eden Yerushalmi, Ori Danino, Carmel Gat, and Alex Lobanov.
The restrictive measures Urich was subjected to - and which will now be extended until November - are an occupation ban, a contact ban on anyone else connected to the case - including the prime minister - and a travel ban.
Specifically, the occupation ban was not in the original requests by police when the case opened, but rather was added later. Michles explained in his decision that part of the reason that the Magistrate’s Court wasn’t convinced by the police was that the basis for request for an occupation ban was the Bild case - not the Qatargate case - and that the expert security opinion that established a measure of danger was not a final one. Additionally, there were flaws in the request by police, and other suspects were not subjected to the occupation ban. As well, there was not strong enough evidence presented to establish a threat to state security.
Michles pointed out that the occupation ban, in his analysis, doesn’t change Urich’s position by much, as the contact ban prevented him from returning to his former employment situation anyway - the Prime Minister’s Office and the Perception company, which is also at the heart of the Qatargate investigations.
Legally, the basis for extending an occupation ban is a “substantial suspicion that the continuation of employment poses a risk to public security, or can aid in the future execution of a similar crime.” Michles’s analysis is that, based on Urich’s stance, that his actions were committed “in good faith,” the return to his place of employment would create the conditions to carry out similar actions, ones that could cause damage, particularly in passing along sensitive information.
He added that the ban minimizes the risk of contamination of the investigation. He wrote that both cases - Qatargate and Bild - are enough of a reason to adhere to the police’s request to extend the ban, both on employment and contact.