The Central District Court in Lod on Thursday accepted a police appeal and ordered a new hearing regarding the mobile devices of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s adviser Yonatan Urich in connection with the ongoing “Qatargate” and Bild investigations.
The Magistrate’s Court in Rishon Lezion, presided over by Judge Menahem Mizrahi, was mistaken when it declined to discuss the police request to continue holding Urich’s two cellphones and one computer on grounds that investigators had not filed a classified report summarizing the evidence and planned actions, Judge Jacob Spasser ruled.
“There is no statutory obligation to submit a secret report,” he wrote. “If the lower court considered it necessary, it could have asked the police to prepare one and then proceeded to consider the application on its merits.”
The District Court accepted the appeal and remanded the case to the Magistrate’s Court for a full hearing. In the meantime, the court extended the police’s retention of the devices until further notice.
Urich’s phones and a computer were seized in March as part of the investigation. According to the police, the devices contain potentially crucial evidence, but technical barriers and lack of passwords have so far prevented data extraction.
Decryption software updates periodically allow renewed access attempts, the police said last week, and they requested an additional 180 days to hold the items.
Mizrahi had refused to extend the retention on the grounds that without a classified report, the court could not properly weigh investigative needs against Urich’s property and privacy rights.
Practice of submitting a secret report to a judge is customary, not a requirement
The District Court’s decision reverses that approach, emphasizing that while secret reports are a common investigative practice, they are not legally mandatory. The practice of submitting a classified report to a judge is a customary tool, not a statutory requirement, the court ruled.
Its purpose is to enable review of evidence without revealing sensitive information, but the court may instead rely on standard affidavits, oral testimony, or inspection of unclassified materials. Spasser’s opinion aligns with this precedent.
The Qatargate probe involves allegations that individuals close to Netanyahu were involved in a pro-Qatari lobby while managing sensitive diplomatic and media portfolios, especially while Qatar serves as a mediator in the Israel-Hamas War.
Urich, a longtime communications aide, has been one of the main suspects in both cases.
The case now returns to the Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court, which must hold a hearing about whether the police may continue to hold Urich’s devices and, if so, for how long. In the meantime, they are being held by the police.