Major General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, Israel’s former Military Advocate General, recently resigned amid allegations that she leaked a video allegedly showing the abuse of Palestinian prisoners at the Sde Teiman internment camp. She was later arrested on suspicion of obstruction of justice, fraud, and breach of trust after allegedly misleading the Israeli High Court of Justice, claiming the military did not know the source of the leak and that an internal investigation had been launched to “find” the leaker.
For years, Israel has increasingly faced accusations of violating international humanitarian law. These accusations have only increased since the start of the Israel-Gaza war in 2023, with criminal warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against certain Israeli leaders and a genocide case pending before the International Criminal Court (ICJ). Israel’s internal military justice system has been supposed to serve as a substitute for at least some international investigations; for years, Israel has maintained that it can investigate itself, by itself. However, some political actors in Israel have made it their goal to weaken any effective internal investigation mechanism. These trends began long before the current war.
The Azaria Scandal
In 2016, Elor Azaria fatally shot Abdel Al-Sharif, a Palestinian who was lying wounded on the ground, minutes after Al-Sharif stabbed an Israeli soldier. Israel’s Military Advocate charged Azaria with homicide, and he was convicted and sentenced to a short prison term. Azaria’s case became a rallying cry for contingents on Israel’s right, fueling protests and dissent. Some protesters openly called for the murder of the then-Chief of Staff of the IDF because of his criticism of Azaria’s actions. A senior government member claimed that “soldiers fear the Advocate General more than they fear Yehya Sinwar.” referring to the (now-deceased) Hamas leader. The Minister of Defense, who backed the Advocate General and the investigation, was subsequently dismissed by Prime Minister Netanyahu.
Around the same time, B’Tselem and other prominent human rights organizations in Israel announced they had stopped cooperating with the Military Advocate General’s Office (MAG) after the MAG was reluctant to thoroughly investigate and prosecute cases of abuse of power by soldiers. B’Tselem’s report revealed that only 3 percent of complaints about violence against Palestinians resulted in criminal indictments against the perpetrators.
While the Azaria case was not the first time the legitimacy of the MAG was questioned in Israel, it appears that ever since the case, there has been an increasing political opposition to the role of the MAG, with a growing sentiment that the MAG is “tying the hands” of the military from successfully fighting terrorism and Israel’s enemies. Whether the growing reluctance to pursue MAG prosecutions resulted from these external pressures or the internal unwillingness of the MAG to investigate soldiers, the fact remains that in recent years military prosecutions in Israel have become increasingly rare. And then the 2023 war began.
MAG in The Israel-Gaza War and The Sde Teiman Case
The MAG’s reluctance, to put it mildly, to investigate alleged crimes committed by Israeli military personnel has been well documented. Human rights organizations and researchers have pointed out several specific cases, such as the World Kitchen strike, where seven members of the organization were killed in a drone strike. An internal investigation revealed violations of orders and military regulations, but no criminal probe was initiated against the soldiers who ordered the strike. Other reports focused on the reckless (again an understatement) use of AI in carrying out strikes and estimating civilian casualties. These actions, too, were carried out with impunity.
A notable exception, however, can be found in the multiple MAG investigations launched into the operation of the Sde Teiman military base, which has served as an internment camp during the war. Sde Teiman has gained notoriety for alleged detainee abuse, with dozens of reported detainee deaths. Investigation probes were launched into alleged misconduct in the compound, with some cases already resulting in convictions.
One of these investigations took place after a detainee was hospitalized, and a medical exam raised suspicions of sexual abuse. Israeli Military Police (MPs) arrived at the Sde Teiman compound, but the suspected IDF soldiers refused to cooperate, leading to infighting, with some MPs being attacked and held at gunpoint. Information about the incident spread across social media, with right-wing political agitators, including Members of Knesset, calling on the public to come to the compound to protest the soldiers’ detention. A crowd gathered outside Sde Teiman, eventually breaking into the camp. At last, the MPs managed to arrest the soldiers and took them to a military court in Beit Lid. The protests followed them there. Once again, protesters stormed into the Beit Lid military compound, raiding the military court and “searching” for the arrested soldiers. For hours, they acted with impunity. The Israeli Police responded slowly, seemingly tolerating the protesters’ actions.
In the following days, the MAG officers overseeing the investigation were doxed, with some being “subjected to personal attacks, harsh insults, and even real threats.” Senior government members criticized the MAG for carrying out the raid and arresting the soldiers. In response, Major General Yerushalmi, the head of the MAG, decided to secretly leak a surveillance video showing soldiers abusing the detainee. She later explained that her actions were meant to protect her officers and dispel false accusations against the corps.
From that point, the leaking of the video, rather than the abuse shown in it, has become the primary focus. Political leaders have called for a thorough investigation into the leak, and a petition has been filed with the Israeli High Court of Justice, requesting an independent inquiry into the issue. In response, Yerushalmi and the MAG announced that the corps is actively investigating the leak. All along, Yerushalmi and some of the senior officers in the corps knew the source of the leak – it was them. Ultimately, this attempted cover-up was exposed when one of the officers underwent a routine security clearance ahead of a judicial nomination, and disclosed information about the leaked video during a polygraph test.
Yerushalmi subsequently stepped down from the military, and a criminal investigation was launched into the leak and cover-up. However, for some political figures, this was not enough. Yerushalmi was branded a villain by politicians and journalists, with the Minister of Defense stating that he would strip her of her rank, others labeling her a traitor.
On Sunday, November 2, Yerushalmi left a note for her family, parked her car near the beach, and disappeared. Search parties looked for her for hours but found nothing. Many assumed the worst – she couldn’t handle the pressure. Eventually, Yerushalmi reached out to her husband: she was safe. She was then taken to the hospital and later arrested. Police couldn’t find her phone, raising suspicions that the entire incident was an orchestrated scheme to destroy evidence. A prominent right-wing commentator tweeted after she was found alive: “We can resume the lynch.”
Israel’s MAG – a Look at The Future
While the Yerushalmi case is far from over and many questions remain unanswered, some factions on the political right can claim another victory against the rule of law within the military; as mentioned, Sde Teiman was among the rare significant criminal investigations launched during the war. The MAG has faced considerable criticism for not doing enough to hold Israeli soldiers accountable for violating the military code of conduct. Haaretz newspaper, citing sources within the MAG, reported that after the Sde Teiman events, Yerushalmi refused to open new investigations against soldiers – perhaps out of fear. For some, even that was too much.
The MAG, along with its complementary departments in the military, enjoys extensive investigative and prosecutorial powers, acting independently from the general chain of command. Nevertheless, these powers are meaningless if they are not used. And for at least the past two years, not enough has been done.
This lack of action by the MAG has led to accusations that Israel’s internal justice system lost its complementarity, prompting foreign jurisdictions to initiate their own investigations into the conduct of Israeli soldiers during the war. Without taking a definitive stance on the issue, the current situation does not seem promising; the military is hesitant to investigate misconduct by its soldiers, and the few cases that are investigated provoke such public and political backlash as to discourage any future inquiries. So far, the discussion surrounding Israel’s complementarity has centered on the unwillingness aspect of the complementarity doctrine. However, with the increasing pressures on the MAG, the ability to meaningfully investigate and prosecute violations is increasingly put into question.
At this point, it is crucial to highlight that safeguarding the Israeli MAG is in the best interest of everyone who values the rule of law, regardless of their broader views on the conflict. Even for those who believe Israel is unwilling or unable to investigate itself, especially with respect to high-ranking officials, the capacity of international tribunals to effectively and timely investigate and prevent violations is, at best, limited. The authority of the MAG within the IDF enables it to influence policy in real-time, not only enforcing but also preventing violations of international law. In this regard, a functioning internal review mechanism cannot be fully replaced by an international body, which has inherently limited resources and access to enforce compliance in real-time. Even when it comes to holding violators accountable, international institutions naturally face limitations in access to information and evidence, and cannot meaningfully replace an effective internal investigative system.
That said, the Israeli MAG seems to be increasingly unable to fulfill its duties in holding violators accountable, partly due to political pressures, including from certain government officials. Therefore, it is essential for Israeli leaders, both in the military and civilian sectors, to safeguard the legitimacy and independence of the MAG; Israel’s allies should also emphasize the critical role the MAG plays in their ongoing cooperation with Israel. Additionally, members of the international law community must voice their support for a robust and independent MAG. As noted above, dismissing the role of the Israeli MAG would be counterproductive; while the MAG faces significant and growing challenges to performing its duties independently and effectively, there is no fully adequate alternative to an internal compliance institution.
Finally, the Sde Teiman case demonstrates that many in the MAG still value the rule of law and the enforcement of international norms, including the officers involved in the investigation and the higher chain of command that authorized and supported them. This is said regardless of whether Yerushalmi should have acted differently with respect to the leak and cover-up. Ultimately, the Sde Teiman soldiers accused of abusing prisoners were indicted with charges of aggravated battery and abuse, and their trial is still ongoing. Therefore, while many changes are needed in the MAG, there is hope, and an urgent need, that the MAG will once again uphold the rule of law and enforce humanitarian duties during war.
The MAG and the Judicial Overhaul
The growing pressure on the MAG office takes place within the broader context of the judicial overhaul in Israel, where the current government has attempted to pursue several constitutional reforms aimed at weakening the independence of the judiciary. One of the motivating arguments for the overhaul has been the perceived restraints imposed by the judicial establishment on the IDF. For example, the Israeli High Court of Justice has also been criticized for protecting, albeit only partially, the rights of detainees during the war. Justice Ruth Ronen oversaw a petition regarding the detention conditions of Palestinian prisoners and conducted a surprise visit to a detention facility. In response, she was chastised by government ministers, with protesters throwing toilet paper at her house following her insistence that it be provided to prisoners.
The attacks on the MAG can thus be viewed as a part of a broader attempt to weaken the legal establishment in Israel. Even in the Sde Teiman case, government officials accused Gali Baharav-Miara, the Attorney General, of cooperating in the cover-up of the leak and demanded that she step down from the investigation. The Minister of Justice, Yariv Levin, attempted to appoint the State Ombudsman for Judges to lead the investigation. The Supreme Court ruled on the matter, deciding that neither the Baharav-Miara nor the Ombudsman could oversee the investigation, instead requiring Levin to appoint an experienced public employee with no political ties to fill the role. Levin chose a retired judge, whose appointment is also set to come under the Court’s scrutiny. Regardless, if the investigation were to link Baharav-Miara to the cover-up of the leak, the government could use this as grounds for replacing her, something it has unsuccessfully attempted to do for months; the AG is the chief prosecutor in Israel, and her replacement could influence Netanyahu’s ongoing corruption trial.
These dynamics demonstrate the role of the MAG in upholding the rule of law in Israel as part of the broader judicial apparatus. The weakening of the MAG affects not only the IDF’s ability to carry out its missions lawfully, but also the broader protection of the rule of law in Israel.
