Yonatan Urich, a senior aide and personal media adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, will be permitted to continue working at the Prime Minister’s Office and remain in contact with Netanyahu, after the Tel Aviv District Court rejected a prosecution request on Thursday to reimpose restrictive conditions against him in the Bild leak case.
Judge Ala Masarwa rejected the request for a second time, after first declining to impose the restrictions on an interim basis earlier this month.
The prosecution had asked the court to bar Urich from entering the PMO, security facilities, or other places where classified information may be held. It also sought to prohibit contact with Netanyahu and others connected to the case until the end of proceedings.
The issue before the court was whether prosecutors had shown that he posed a current risk of obstructing proceedings or creating a security danger serious enough to justify removing him from the office while the criminal case proceeds.
Prosecutors argued that he had already demonstrated a willingness to obstruct the investigation. They told the court on Thursday that Urich had said he replaced his phone about every six months, but that investigators later concluded that he typically changed devices only once every two years, and that he replaced his phone one day after former Prime Minister’s Office spokesman Eli Feldstein was arrested.
Urich alleged to have helped disseminate classified information around hostage talks
The prosecution alleged that the replacement eliminated what it described as a central source of evidence, including potentially relevant communications from the old phone.
“The danger posed by Urich is high, and the potential harm is serious,” the prosecution representative said, arguing that the severity of the charges and the potential punishment created a heightened incentive to interfere with proceedings.
Masarwa questioned why the restrictions should be restored now, nearly two years after the alleged offenses.
“As time passes, the danger diminishes,” he said, noting that the concern over interference had been at its strongest when investigators first arrived at Urich’s home.
The judge pointed to the fact that Urich had previously been allowed to meet with Netanyahu, including after the affair became public.
“Now, after a year and a half, the obstruction has returned?” Masarwa asked. “I have a hard time with that.”
The prosecution responded that the earlier lapse in restrictions did not mean that they were unnecessary. Rather, it said, the restrictions had expired during wartime, when investigators were unable to set a date for Netanyahu’s testimony in the case.
Prosecutors said they had continued trying to obtain Netanyahu’s testimony even after that period, but ultimately moved forward without it. Urich’s lawyer, Amit Hadad, disputed that account, arguing that the defense had requested Netanyahu’s testimony and that prosecutors had delayed taking it.
The hearing also came against the backdrop of a reported discrepancy between Netanyahu’s and Urich’s accounts of how the Prime Minister’s Office operated.
Channel 13 reported last week that Netanyahu had sought to distance himself from Feldstein, saying there had been no ongoing direct working relationship between them.
Urich, according to the report, told investigators that PMO spokespeople worked directly with Netanyahu and that every statement required the prime minister’s approval.
Were Feldstein’s alleged actions carried out with authorization from within Netanyahu’s inner circle?
The issue goes to a central question in the case: who gave instructions to Feldstein and whether his alleged actions were carried out with authorization from within the Prime Minister’s Office?
Earlier this month, Urich was added to an amended indictment in the Bild leak case, alongside Feldstein and IDF reservist Ari Rosenfeld.
The case centers on allegations that classified military intelligence concerning Hamas’s position in hostage negotiations was removed from authorized channels and later published in the German newspaper Bild in September 2024, after the military censor barred publication in Israel.
According to the indictment, Rosenfeld contacted Feldstein in June 2024 and transferred classified intelligence material after Feldstein expressed interest in obtaining it.
Prosecutors allege that Feldstein updated Urich and that, after the military censor blocked publication in Israel, Urich directed Feldstein to Netanyahu associate Israel Einhorn as a possible route for placing the material with foreign media.
The indictment alleges that Urich and Feldstein used highly classified information to influence public discourse around the hostage negotiations. Prosecutors say the publication exposed the existence, capabilities, and methods of a secret intelligence tool and could have harmed intelligence-gathering capabilities and sources.
Urich is charged with providing secret information with intent to harm state security, providing secret information, possessing secret information, and destroying evidence.
In a post on X after the ruling, Urich wrote that “the prosecution lost again” and accused it of trying to prevent him from working toward a Likud election victory. He said he would continue working for Netanyahu.
His lawyers have denied wrongdoing and argued that the prosecution’s case is unsupported by the evidence.
Thursday’s ruling resolves only the prosecution’s request for interim restrictions. The amended indictment against Urich remains pending in the Tel Aviv District Court, where the case will move to its next procedural stages alongside the proceedings against Feldstein and Rosenfeld. Netanyahu remains listed as a prosecution witness in the amended indictment, although no date has been publicly set for testimony in the case.