Supreme Court Justice David Mintz on Sunday rejected a request by Prime Minister’s Office chief of staff Tzachi Braverman for leave to appeal a district court ruling that reinstated restrictive conditions against him in the so-called “midnight meeting” affair, including a ban on leaving Israel, keeping the restrictions in place through Tuesday.
Braverman had asked the Supreme Court to intervene after the Lod District Court overturned an earlier magistrate’s decision that had lifted the travel ban and narrowed limits on his contacts, arguing that the continued restrictions were unnecessary and disproportionately harmed both his diplomatic appointment as Israel’s next ambassador to the United Kingdom and the country’s foreign relations more broadly.
According to his appeal, the case raises unresolved legal questions about whether courts weighing pre-trial release conditions may consider broader public interests - including potential harm to Israel’s diplomatic standing - alongside the needs of an ongoing investigation.
Mintz declined to rule on that broader question, saying the case did not justify Supreme Court intervention at this stage. Leave to appeal in matters involving pre-trial restrictions is typically granted only in rare cases that raise a significant legal issue of public importance, he noted - a threshold this case did not meet.
He added that the restrictions imposed on Braverman were due to expire within days, making the case a poor fit for setting precedent on how much discretion judges have in weighing such conditions.
Even assuming, for argument’s sake, that diplomatic considerations could be relevant in such proceedings, Mintz wrote, it was difficult to see how a brief extension of the travel ban would meaningfully harm Israel’s foreign relations in a way that would justify overturning the district court’s balancing between investigative needs and Braverman’s personal interests.
Court upholds Braverman’s restrictions amid probe into leak
The decision leaves in force the set of restrictions reinstated by the district court, which bar Braverman from leaving Israel, restrict his contact with individuals connected to the probe - including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu - and prevent him from entering certain sensitive workplaces, including the Prime Minister’s Office compound and the Kirya military headquarters.
Investigators suspect Braverman of transmitting official information by a public servant, obstructing justice, and fraud and breach of trust in connection with a broader investigation into the leak of classified military intelligence to the German newspaper Bild during wartime.
The underlying probe centers on the unauthorized transfer in September 2024 of sensitive intelligence materials relating to Hamas’s internal assessment of hostage negotiations and Israeli public pressure for a deal - documents that were published abroad after failing to receive military censor approval and which investigators believe may have been leaked in an effort to shape domestic opinion on the continuation of military pressure in Gaza.
Former Prime Minister’s Office spokesman Eli Feldstein was later charged in connection with the possession and dissemination of the materials, which prosecutors allege could have caused serious harm to state security and to wartime efforts to secure the release of hostages.
According to investigative material cited in the court proceedings, Braverman is suspected of having learned in October 2024 that security authorities had opened a probe into the leak and subsequently summoning Feldstein to a late-night meeting at the Kirya, where he allegedly showed him the names of individuals believed to be under investigation and asked whether the matter was “connected to us,” adding that if it involved the Prime Minister’s Office he could “turn it off.”
The Bild leak itself forms part of a wider investigation into the unauthorized transfer of sensitive security materials abroad during wartime that has intersected with what has become known as the “Qatargate” affair, examining alleged improper channels and foreign influence surrounding hostage diplomacy after October 7.
That parallel probe has focused on suspicions that senior advisers to Netanyahu - including Feldstein and close associates Yonatan Urich and Israel “Srulik” Einhorn - received payments tied to Qatari interests in order to promote a favorable public narrative about Doha’s role in mediation efforts following the Hamas attacks, despite the Gulf state’s longstanding ties to the terror group.
In rejecting the appeal, Mintz also addressed Braverman’s contention that a travel ban requires concrete evidence of an intent to flee the country, reiterating that under existing Supreme Court case law such a restriction may also be imposed where there is a substantive concern that a suspect’s presence abroad could obstruct an ongoing investigation.
The district court, he noted, had already determined on the basis of the investigative material before it that the case presented a significant risk of obstruction, justifying the reinstatement of the full slate of conditions.