Netanyahu seeks NIS 2.6m. from media outlets over reports of UAE's warning about October 7

Suit targets Haaretz, Ynet, Channel 12, and six journalists and commentators over disputed reports that Arab officials warned Netanyahu before the Hamas attack.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is seeking NIS 2.6 million in a defamation suit against three major Israeli media groups and six journalists and commentators over reports that he personally received warnings ahead of Hamas’s October 7 attack but did not pass them to Israel’s security chiefs.

The lawsuit, dated Tuesday and addressed to the Jerusalem District Court, names Haaretz, Yediot Aharonot, Ynet and Channel 12 as defendants.

It also names Haaretz journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval, Haaretz columnist Uri Misgav, Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Nadav Eyal, Channel 12 Washington correspondent Barak Ravid and former Ynet journalist Attila Somfalvi.

The suit centers on two disputed accounts: that United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed warned Netanyahu in late September 2023 that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was planning a major operation, and that then-Egyptian intelligence chief Abbas Kamel personally warned him shortly before the attack.

The media reports cited unnamed sources, while Netanyahu has repeatedly denied receiving either warning.

First mention of report done by Haaretz

The first account was published by Haaretz on September 8 as part of an investigation by Eldar and Yuval for their book, Hostages: 843 Days of Abandonment. They reported that bin Zayed spoke with Netanyahu for approximately 45 minutes after receiving a message that Sinwar was preparing a major “surprise.”

The report said Netanyahu did not relay the warning to the defense minister, IDF chief of staff, Shin Bet director or Mossad director. Netanyahu’s office denied that the conversation occurred.

According to the suit, official Prime Minister’s Office records contain no entry, telephone record or other documentation of direct contact between Netanyahu and bin Zayed between September 1 and October 7, 2023.

The filing argues that Haaretz and its journalists published the account despite Netanyahu’s denial and that other defendants repeated or amplified it. It cites Misgav’s description of the alleged failure as “betrayal from within,” Channel 12 reports on the purported call, and Eyal’s column arguing that the warning had stopped with Netanyahu.

Haaretz previously rejected Netanyahu’s demand to remove the investigation, publish an apology and pay him NIS 1 million. The newspaper said the report resulted from an extensive, source-based investigation into a matter of overriding public interest and that it was prepared to defend the reporting in court.

Israeli media cited a New York Times report

Subsequent reports have added to, rather than resolved, the dispute. Israeli media cited a New York Times report in which five Israeli officials reportedly supported the account that bin Zayed warned Netanyahu. An Emirati official later denied that the UAE president had personally warned Netanyahu of an imminent Hamas attack, although an earlier Emirati response did not categorically deny that communication took place.

The second part of the lawsuit concerns a Ynet report, based on The Wall Street Journal, that Kamel telephoned Netanyahu in early October 2023 and warned of an approaching attack from Gaza.

Netanyahu denied speaking or meeting with Kamel in the months before October 7 and said no Israeli intelligence official conveyed such a warning to him.

The claim also refers to separate reporting that Kamel made a brief visit to Israel on September 26, 2023, and warned Israeli officials that Gaza was approaching a major escalation. That account did not establish publicly whom Kamel met during the visit or that he spoke directly with Netanyahu.

Netanyahu argues that the defendants acted deliberately and for political and commercial gain during an election campaign.

The suit seeks at least NIS 2.6 million without requiring proof of specific financial damage. It argues that the reports constituted numerous separate publications across print, television, news websites and social media, and that any statutory award should be increased because they were allegedly published with intent to cause harm.

Under Israeli defamation law, the defendants may argue, among other defenses, that the reporting was true and concerned a matter of public interest, or that it was published in good faith following responsible journalistic work.

The defendants have 60 days from the date they are formally served to submit their statements of defense.