Ari Rosenfeld named as NCO involved in PMO documents leak case

Ari (Aharon) Rosenfeld was named as the NCO involved in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) leaked document affair, court documents released on Monday showed.

An indictment filed last month alleges that Rosenfeld in April sent a picture via the Telegram messaging app of a top-secret document to Eliezer Feldstein – who was an aide to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the main suspect in the leak scandal – believing it to be imperative for the prime minister to receive directly.

Feldstein did not immediately pass on the document. At the beginning of September, he attempted to leak its contents to Israeli media, to counter mass protests that broke out after six bodies of recently executed hostages were retrieved from Gaza. The military censor prohibited its publication.

The state opposed releasing Rosenfeld’s name and information, but the judge in the ruling, Tel Aviv Regional Court judge Ala’a Masarwa, ruled that while he did not dismiss the prosecutor’s arguments, a balance could be reached by allowing his name to be released while restricting information about his rank and role.

Rosenfeld spoke in court for the first time this week, saying, “It was important to me to be physically present. For some reason, that didn’t happen. I wanted to say that throughout my adult life, in reserves and even in my daily work, I have acted for the state. I have always contributed. I don’t understand how I ended up still being detained. I made a mistake in how I acted. I will never do anything like this again, especially after this ordeal. I never thought of repeating my actions.”

He added, “I cannot fight for my innocence while in the dark, with things being told to the public. I cannot defend my good name or explain what I did,” and requested “to lift the gag order.”

Judge Ala'a Masarwa's comments

Masarwa emphasized Rosenfeld’s right to advance his defense.

“The court has, in principle, acknowledged the possibility of issuing a confidentiality certificate for a defendant’s statements during interrogations, but it has been established as a rare exception,” the judge explained.

“In this case, guided by the principle of open judicial proceedings and the lack of severe harm to the defendant himself – who requested the publication – it remains the state’s concern to keep his service in a classified unit confidential. While these considerations are important, I did not find them sufficient to outweigh opposing arguments, particularly his fundamental right to be identified by name.”

The judge added, “As done in special cases, such as publishing details of former members of classified units, an exception can be made here given the significant countervailing interests. However, this is subject to limiting the disclosure to exclude details about his rank, role, and areas of expertise during his service.”

Regarding the request to release additional details from the indictment and hearing protocols, Masarwa agreed to review the restrictions on the gag order. He accepted a proposal from both parties for the prosecution and intelligence agencies to reclassify confidential sections, after which the court would review the documents.

The prosecution was instructed to submit these documents within a week, including its position on publishing details about the “extraneous entity” mentioned in the indictment.

“With careful consideration, it is possible to allow the release of additional details from the indictment, as was previously clarified by the prosecution,” the judge detailed. “When weighing these decisions, the legitimate interests of various petitioners, including representatives of the hostages’ families and the media, must be taken into account, ensuring the boundaries of national security concerns are maintained.”

Eliav Breuer contributed to this report.