The Jerusalem Magistrate's Court recently concluded a high-profile defamation lawsuit filed by physicist and protest leader Prof. Shikma Bressler against right-wing activist Fani Michaeli. Senior Judge Dorit Feinstein upheld the plaintiff's claims, ordering Michaeli to pay 100,000 NIS in damages, plus 35,000 NIS in legal fees and an additional 5,500 NIS in court costs.
The legal proceedings centered on inflammatory posts Michaeli uploaded to social media following October 7th, which included severe allegations against Bressler regarding treason, aiding Hamas, and having prior knowledge of the massacre. According to the lawsuit, the posts also included violent calls and physical threats against Bressler.
In her defense, Michaeli argued for free speech, freedom of expression, truth in publication, and claimed the lawsuit was a SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). She also contended that her statements were based on previous reports by Member of Knesset Tali Gottlieb. However, Judge Feinstein rejected all of the defense's arguments outright.
In her ruling, the judge stated that the publications fall into the highest category of defamation, emphasizing that the defendant failed to present any evidentiary basis for her grave allegations. The court determined that the publications constituted a continuous event and thus awarded double the maximum damages due to the severity of the content and the clear intent to harm the plaintiff's reputation.
Beyond the monetary compensation, the court ordered Michaeli to delete the relevant posts and publish a formal apology and clarification within one month. The verdict has stirred significant public debate, with crowdfunding initiatives among right-wing circles beginning immediately to assist with the payment of damages. Screenwriter and right-wing activist Meni Assayag led a call for donations, harshly criticizing the ruling as draconian and a silencing tactic. Assayag stated that Michaeli's supporters intend to aid her in the legal battle, while expressing sharp criticism toward the judicial system and Bressler herself.
This case highlights the complexity regarding the boundaries between free speech and offensive content on social media, as well as the real legal consequences for those expressing views in the digital sphere. The verdict serves as a reminder that claims made without factual basis in public discourse can lead to significant civil liability in defamation law, even when presented under the guise of political opinion or social critique.