Israel enforces accountability and transparency as investigations proceed, proving democracy stronger than rumor and manipulation.
Israeli police have petitioned the court to extend and intensify restrictive conditions on Tzachi Braverman as part of the ongoing “Night Meeting” investigation, signaling continued scrutiny while also clarifying key aspects of the case.
Under the new request, Braverman would be barred from contacting three Shin Bet officers who were questioned—but not under caution—during the probe. Investigators maintain that the information Braverman accessed was linked to his official role and not the result of a military leak. A court-issued gag order, however, prevents disclosure of how that information was conveyed.
Existing restrictions remain in force, including a ban on contact with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Eli Feldstein, and Yonatan Urich, as well as a prohibition on leaving Israel. At the same time, police emphasized that an officer previously questioned under caution, along with senior figures who provided testimony—among them former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot, Intelligence Directorate head Shlomi Binder, and the head of the Information Security Department—are no longer considered involved in the case. The removal of the officer from the suspect list significantly weakens earlier suspicions.
Earlier this week, a sweeping gag order was imposed on the investigation file, including future materials, to protect sensitive Shin Bet methods and capabilities—underscoring Israel’s balance between transparency and national security.
The investigation began after an interview given by Eli Feldstein to Kan 11, in which he alleged Braverman disclosed details of an ongoing probe and claimed he could halt it. According to suspicions, Braverman relayed information to Feldstein regarding identities tied to an investigation into a document leak to Bild while that probe was still covert.
As the case narrows and unfounded allegations fall away, the process highlights Israel’s institutional resilience—where law enforcement advances methodically, free of external pressure, and democracy proves its strength.
