The authorization by a senior official in the Military Advocate General’s Office of the release of a doctored video from the Sde Teiman detention facility exposed a major vulnerability inside Israel’s wartime oversight system. The video circulated globally, misrepresented events inside the base, and fueled accusations that carried serious diplomatic and operational consequences.
The leak mattered because it introduced strategic risk at a sensitive moment. The video’s content, later contradicted by internal investigations, contributed to claims that Israel’s military had engaged in sexualized abuse. Under the U.S. Leahy Law, American assistance cannot go to foreign units implicated in such offenses. A single piece of misleading evidence, released from inside Israel’s own legal system, could therefore have triggered sanctions and disrupted cooperation essential to Israel’s war effort in Gaza.
The video circulated globally, misrepresented events inside the base, and fueled accusations that carried serious diplomatic and operational consequences.
Multiple investigations have since revealed how the failure unfolded. In 2023, Military Advocate General Maj. Gen. Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi approved the release of a video purporting to show misconduct by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel at Sde Teiman. The video conflicted with statements from the soldiers involved and from the detainee shown in the footage. Despite the discrepancy, the Military Advocate General’s Office presented the material in ways that contributed to international pressure and misinformed judicial proceedings. The Military Advocate General’s Office told the High Court of Justice that it launched an internal investigation but could not locate the source of the leak.
The claim collapsed when the Shin Bet produced evidence showing that senior figures inside the Military Advocate General’s Office had knowingly authorized the release. Investigators recovered Tomer-Yerushalmi’s phone from the sea after she disappeared for several hours during questioning. Forensic teams now review the device to determine the full scope of communication surrounding the leak. Police suspicion includes fraud, breach of trust, abuse of office, obstruction of justice, and the unauthorized transmission of information by a public servant.
The inquiry widened after the detention of Chief Military Prosecutor Col. Matan Solomesh, who apparently played a central role in coordinating official responses to the leak. Investigators found that internal reporting failed to match the facts established by later intelligence. The attempt to attribute the leak to unknown actors persisted for more than a year, even as evidence pointed to coordinated activity by senior officials.
Former senior IDF prosecutor Lt. Col. Maurice Hirsch highlighted the potential strategic consequences in a recent interview. He noted that if foreign governments believed the doctored video accurately reflected IDF conduct, the result could include sanctions or restrictions on U.S. military aid. Hirsch stated, “It would be good if that remains a conspiracy theory and was never confirmed in any way, shape, or form—because that would literally be not just lying to the courts. That would potentially be treason.”
The risk is not theoretical. International institutions and foreign governments have already used the Sde Teiman allegations to call for investigations and impose diplomatic pressure. Because the video originated from inside Israel’s legal system, the material carried additional weight. An internal failure thus amplified external efforts to constrain Israel’s operational freedom during wartime.
The vulnerability revealed in this case is not unique to Israel. The United States experienced a similar breach when Edward Snowden, acting alone, compromised core elements of the American intelligence community. A single insider, operating without sufficient oversight, created outsized strategic damage. Democracies depend on internal guardians, and when one fails, the consequences extend far beyond institutional boundaries.
An internal misrepresentation traveled globally and shaped international narratives for more than a year before investigators corrected the record.
The Sde Teiman case shows how internal legal structures can become points of failure if they lack independent review mechanisms. Wartime decision-making depends on trust between operational, intelligence, and legal bodies. When legal authorities release inaccurate material, mislead courts, or contradict established intelligence findings, the result is confusion inside the system and vulnerability outside it. In this case, an internal misrepresentation traveled globally and shaped international narratives for more than a year before investigators corrected the record.
The investigation should therefore extend beyond individual accountability to structural reform. Israel must strengthen oversight of the Military Advocate General’s Office and establish independent wartime review mechanisms that cannot be bypassed by senior officials. Independent auditing of internal communications, clearer documentation of evidentiary chains, and formal intelligence-legal liaison procedures would reduce the possibility of future breaches. Without such safeguards, the same vulnerabilities that allowed a doctored video to circulate internationally could reappear in future crises.
Democracies do not fail only when external enemies act against them. They fail when internal guardians, acting without oversight, compromise the integrity of the institutions entrusted with national defense. Israel can prevent a recurrence of the Sde Teiman failure, but doing so requires structural reform, independent oversight, and a recognition that even a single official acting alone can create strategic consequences.
