The Supreme Court recently dismissed a petition seeking to prevent State Attorney Amit Aisman from handling the criminal investigation regarding the leak of a video from the Sde Teiman affair. The petition requested the court to order Justice Minister Yariv Levin to appoint an external authority to supervise the investigation, citing the involvement of former Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi. In their ruling, Supreme Court President Isaac Amit and Justice Khaled Kabub determined there was no legal basis to intervene in the updated opinion of the Ministry of Justice's Legal Advisor, Yael Kotik, which held that the conflict of interest (recusal) previously imposed on the State Attorney had been removed. Justice David Mintz issued a dissenting opinion.
According to published reports, the updated March opinion determined that despite the continued recusal of Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, there is no longer any impediment to State Attorney Aisman handling the case. This determination followed police notification that investigative actions had concluded without uncovering evidence suggesting the involvement of parties outside the Military Prosecution circle. President Amit noted in his ruling that the Minister avoided appointing a supervisory figure according to the previously established framework, and held that he cannot rely on this lack of appointment to challenge the investigation's results. Furthermore, it was determined that the Minister’s 2023 decision, designating Aisman to fill the Attorney General's role in cases where the Attorney General is recused, automatically returns to force.
Justice Kabub added that the court does not typically intervene in such legal opinions and that no prima facie evidence was presented to contradict the conclusion regarding a conflict of interest. Conversely, in his dissent, Justice Mintz argued that the recusal could not have been lifted without appointing an external supervisor, as the integrity of the investigation could not otherwise be guaranteed. The three justices unanimously agreed to reject the demand to order the police to perform additional investigative actions in the case. The matter reached the court against a backdrop of public controversy surrounding the investigation of reservists and the publication of surveillance camera footage from the detention facility, which prompted the IDF to launch a criminal investigation into the leak's circumstances.