Retired judge Asher Kula cannot oversee the investigation into the controversial video leak at the Sde Teiman military detention facility, the High Court of Justice ruled on Sunday.
Justice Minister Yariv Levin had nominated Kula for the role, citing his integrity and experience as an investigator of judicial complaints.
The ruling allows Levin to appoint another senior and independent figure to supervise the inquiry. It underscores the delicate balance between prosecutorial independence and political oversight.
The case arose from petitions over who should serve as the “supervising and accompanying” official for the investigation into allegations of misconduct by former military advocate-general Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi.
Tomer-Yerushalmi approved the leak of a video showing alleged abuse of a Palestinian detainee at Sde Teiman.
Levin vs. AG: Legal battle over Kula's appointment
Due to early involvement in the case by the prosecution, it was problematic for it to be involved in the investigation, the court ruled.
Kula could not legally serve in this capacity, the court said. Under the law, the office he serves explicitly prohibits holding other roles, and concerns were raised.
Justice Yael Willner, the lead author of the verdict, said the justice minister retains the authority to appoint a supervisor, but the nominee must be a senior civil servant with significant legal experience, independent of political affiliations or institutional entanglements.
The broader scandal has hung over society since August 2024, when a classified surveillance video was leaked, showing alleged abuse of a Palestinian detainee by IDF reservists at Sde Teiman. The footage, which aired on national television, sparked widespread outrage and led to the indictment of several reserve soldiers on various charges, including aggravated abuse and causing severe bodily harm.
The investigation also implicated Tomer‑Yerushalmi, who resigned from her post after admitting to authorizing the leak, reportedly to counter false propaganda against the military prosecution.
She was subsequently arrested on multiple charges, including fraud, obstruction of justice, and disclosure of classified information by a public official.
The highly sensitive nature of the case, combined with the potential involvement of senior officials, made independent supervision essential, the court said.
By rejecting Kula’s appointment, the court said it was maintaining the integrity of the supervisory role while allowing the justice minister to select a qualified alternative.
This effectively ensures the investigation is not left without oversight. What it also might do is open the door to similar conditional, and rare, political appointments.
Levin now faces the task of proposing a new candidate who meets the court’s stringent requirements.
The choice will be closely watched, as it will signal whether the government can uphold both independence and transparency in high-profile investigations.