Did Sara Netanyahu leak secrets on Telegram? The lawsuit that could cost

In December, Sara Netanyahu — wife of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — filed a defamation lawsuit against Channel 12 (Keshet), the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation (Kan), journalist Omri Maniv, and editor Udi Mizrahi. The suit followed reports alleging that Mrs. Netanyahu had leaked sensitive security information via a Telegram channel.

The lawsuit demands a formal apology and NIS 500,000 (approx. $135,000 USD) in damages. Today (Sunday), the defendants filed a scathing statement of defense, portraying the lawsuit as an abuse of legal tools aimed at silencing the press:

“The statement of claim in this case reflects a grim state of affairs — and that’s putting it mildly,” begins the document.

Subscribe to our newsletter

The defense highlights the context in which the lawsuit was filed:

“In the midst of one of the most catastrophic periods Israel has ever known — while many of our citizens remain in Hamas captivity, after more than 500 days — the plaintiff, who at the time was residing in Miami for an extended period, chose to invest time and resources into suing over a magazine segment discussing Telegram activity.”

According to the defense, the lawsuit was filed “in great haste,” just under 48 hours after the broadcast aired — and notably, without any prior communication or demand from the plaintiff to the defendants.

They add:

“Such conduct by the wife of the Prime Minister — especially given the timing, during one of the bloodiest and darkest months in our nation’s history — is highly inappropriate.”

“What Is the Prime Minister’s Wife Occupied With in This Hour of Crisis?”

In one of the more pointed passages, the defense criticizes the lawsuit as a misprioritization bordering on absurd:

“The lawsuit underscores the stark contrast between engaging with what truly matters and chasing irrelevancies. One cannot help but ask: is this truly what the wife of the Prime Minister chooses to focus on during a national emergency?”

They further accuse the First Lady’s legal team of cherry-picking quotes from a feature that did not directly pertain to her, and inflating them into a claim of massive proportions — including “monstrous” financial demands and draconian requests such as the seizure of broadcast materials from national media outlets.

An Attack on the Free Press?

The defendants argue that the lawsuit’s real purpose is to deter criticism and muzzle independent journalism in Israel.

“The plaintiff’s demand that the media remain silent and be ostracized from every corner of the Israeli public sphere aligns seamlessly with her claim that the defendants have launched a ‘campaign of incitement’ against her. Such an assertion is so unfounded that the only real response is: it simply did not happen.”

According to the defense, the lawsuit’s underlying aim is clear:

“This is not a defamation case — it is an effort to intimidate and stifle central media institutions in Israel. The plaintiff, who sees ‘shadows of mountains’ as real mountains, seeks to shut down free press activity and gravely harm the very foundations of freedom of speech — all without any real factual basis.”

And yet, from a strictly legal perspective, the case will ultimately rise or fall on one fundamental question: whether the media outlets in question can prove that what they reported was factually true — and entirely accurate.

Anything short of full factual substantiation may result in Mrs. Netanyahu being awarded significant financial compensation.

Hence, the question arises: did Mrs. Netanyahu truly use the Telegram channel in violation of official protocols, as alleged? The inability to prove this could cost the television networks a considerable sum.