A magistrate court judge rejected a lawsuit against Knesset member Tali Gotliv, who spread defamatory lies against a political rival, citing parliamentary immunity * The judge ruled that it doesn’t matter whether the statements were true or false * Another far-right Knesset member who was sued for spreading false conspiracy theories is now seeking to dismiss the lawsuit against him as well * The chairman of the Democrats party, Yair Golan, who filed the lawsuit against Gotliv, announced he will appeal the decision
A Knesset member can spread conspiracy theories against a political rival and cannot be sued for it, according to a recent court ruling. An appeal of the verdict will be filed with the district court.
Judge Edna Yosef-Kozin from the Petah Tikva Magistrate Court blocked the chairman of the Democrats party, retired General Yair Golan, from suing Likud’s Knesset member Talli Gotliv due to her parliamentary immunity.
Golan sought to require MK Gotliv to compensate him 500,000 shekels (approximately $135,000) after she spread a false conspiracy theory claiming he was involved in an espionage case that occurred near the October 7 Hamas attack. However, the court ruled that spreading the False theory against Golan was part of MK Gotliv’s parliamentary duties.
Gotliv, formerly a lawyer who became known for defending rapists, regularly and consistently uses parliamentary immunity claims not only to spread lies and defamation but also to disrupt court proceedings. She is also promoting legislation that would further strengthen parliamentary immunity and enable the commission of criminal offenses under it.
In December, MK Gotliv said in the Knesset: “Mr. Yair Golan, nice to meet you, Knesset member Tali Gotliv tells you the following in the name of her immunity: Listen carefully, first, you can’t benefit from a ga order for the simple reason that you weren’t investigated in the spy case. Very interesting why you weren’t investigated in the spy case.”
She continued: “As party chairman, you owe the people of Israel explanations for your connection to whoever was accused in Israel in a serious spy case.”
She later repeated her False claims in various media interviews, claiming among other things that “he has some connection to the spy” and “at least his name comes up in some connection not necessarily related to espionage but we need to get answers about why there would be some connection to the spy case.”
In reality, Golan, former Deputy Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, is not only not connected in any way to the false suspicions raised by Gotliv, but rushed to the southern front on the day of the massacre on October 7, and risked himself as a civilian in order to save other people.
After receiving a pre-lawsuit warning letter, MK Gotliv claimed that Golan was “the father of all inciters and rebels,” “part of the machine for destroying the Jewish state,” “the blood of our murdered is on his hands,” and repeated that “the fact that he wasn’t investigated in the spy case, not even in an open interrogation, is horrifying.”
Following these publications, Golan, through attorney Liad Vertzhaizer, filed a lawsuit for 500,000 shekels.
Gotliv argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed due to her parliamentary immunity. “Substantive immunity allows a Knesset member to fulfill his role and represent his voting public while giving free and full expression to his opinions and views without fear,” she claimed.
“Filing the lawsuit despite the existing immunity that cannot be removed is a shameful attempt to intimidate the Knesset member and silence her, completely contrary to the absolute immunity granted to a Knesset member by law.”
According to Gotliv, “all her statements and words referring to Yair Golan, the father of all inciters and rebels based on blatant and shameful lies while he commits criminal offenses of incitement and threats for which complaints are pending against him with the Israel Police, were said within the framework of her role as a Knesset member and for the sake of her role as a Knesset member.” Therefore, she emphasized, her immunity protects her.
Golan argued in response that MK Gotliv “seeks, time after time, to abuse the institution of immunity in order to do ‘what is right in her eyes’ and turn the Israeli Knesset into a ‘city of refuge’ for lawbreakers. In doing so, she repeatedly undermines the fundamental principles according to which parliamentary immunity was designed, primarily – the rule of law and equality before the law. When she spreads false news, she also undermines the central purpose of immunity, which is the core of democracy – maintaining a ‘free market of ideas and opinions’ based on an accurate picture of reality.”
Immunity, Golan emphasized, does not apply to all actions of an MK, but only if his action was done “in fulfilling his role, or for the sake of fulfilling his role, as a Knesset member.” In the current case, he added, the publications were not made within the framework of her role as a Knesset member, as these are planned and targeted publications that include false news that spread among the general public.
Judge Edna Yosef-Kozin accepted MK Gotliv’s request and dismissed the lawsuit outright.
“The question is, in fact, whether the nature of the publications was ‘political,’ then the Knesset member will be granted protection within the framework of immunity in fulfilling her role, or a ‘private’ or ‘personal’ expression that is not protected within the scope of immunity in fulfilling a role,” the judge defined.
According to Judge Yosef-Kozin, the publications were indeed planned, but this does not prevent a Knesset member who publishes them from being protected under immunity, “as long as it is a political expression that is at the heart of parliamentary activity.”
The publications for which the lawsuit was filed were distributed by MK Gotliv “through her work tools as a Knesset member: a speech in the plenum, media interviews, and publication on social networks,” according to the verdict.
Moreover, “the parties are politicians located at two ends of the political spectrum,” the judge ruled. “Even if the publications are an expression of opinion regarding the respondent’s responsibility for the October 7th disaster, and even if these are conspiracy theories against the respondent, they clearly express the political rivalry between the parties, and therefore should be classified as having a distinctly political character. Although these are statements against the respondent himself, the background to them is the political differences of opinion between the parties, and therefore these are not statements of a ‘private’ or ‘personal’ nature, and the substantive immunity should be applied to them, as established in case law.”
In this decision, Judge Yosef-Kozin relied on case law in a petition by former MK Azmi Bishara against the Attorney General from 2003. There it was ruled that criminal proceedings that were brought against MK Bishara after he praised the terrorist organization Hezbollah in speeches should be canceled.
Judge Yosef-Kozin clarifies that assuming MK Gotliv’s publications are indeed false conspiracy theories, “the conclusion as stated above is difficult, since publications about suspicion of espionage for the enemy that led to the heavy disaster of October 7th are accusations of great severity, and they significantly damage the respondent’s good name.” However, she noted, there is no place to remove immunity, in light of the Supreme Court ruling in the Bishara case.
“In light of the above,” she concluded, “the publications that are the subject of the lawsuit are political in nature, said for the purpose of attacking a political rival on a matter at the heart of public discourse, which is responsibility for the October 7th disaster. The things were said in the Knesset plenum and through interviews and publication on social networks, which are the applicant’s work tools as a Knesset member and the core of her activity. Although the publications were planned in advance and even if they constitute libel and spreading conspiracy theories, because they are political discourse, and noting that a Knesset member’s immunity for expression offenses is broad, they fall under the ‘natural risk zone.’ In other words, the publications are the applicant’s expression of opinion ‘while fulfilling her role and for the sake of fulfilling her role, as a Knesset member.’ Therefore, they should be protected under substantive immunity.”
This ruling by Judge Yosef-Kozin may have long-term implications if an appeal reaches the Supreme Court, but it may already affect other lawsuits filed against MK Gotliv and lawsuits filed against other Knesset members. MK Gotliv also raised the immunity claim in a lawsuit filed against her by one of the leaders of the protest movement against the government, Shikma Bressler. Another Likud Knesset member, Nissim Vaturi, also used the immunity claim in a lawsuit filed against him by Golan.
Following Judge Yosef-Kozin’s decision, Deputy Minister Almog Cohen, formerly MK of the The far right Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party, filed a request to dismiss the lawsuit filed against him by the Brothers and Sisters in Arms organization. MK Cohen had previously argued that he enjoys immunity, but now filed a separate request, noting that “given the absolute identity, both in the factual basis and in the legal argument,” between Golan’s lawsuit against MK Gotliv and the lawsuit by Brothers and Sisters in Arms against him, “there is no doubt that this lawsuit should also be dismissed.”
There is indeed a clear connecting line between Gotliv and Cohen: both promote the “traitors from within” conspiracy theory. This theory about collaboration or initiative by Israelis in the October 7th massacre carried out by Hamas is false and baseless, but serves various elements on the far right and among Netanyahu supporters to advance their goals and has gained great popularity.
Among other things, the false conspiracy theory is intended to incite against political rivals, real and imaginary, in order to recruit and inflame supporters, and to remove responsibility from Netanyahu and his government regarding the most severe security failure in Israel’s history. Hostile elements outside Israel also promote the theory in order to intensify the division within Israeli society.
The Article was first published in Hebrew on august 19.
