The Central District Court in Lod ruled on Tuesday that Knesset members enjoy broad immunity for opinions and public criticism, but that protection is not absolute. Judge Rami Haimovich partially accepted MK Tali Gottlieb’s request to dismiss a defamation suit filed against her by Shikma Bresler, but said some of the factual claims she made about Bresler’s husband are not automatically protected at this stage.
According to the courts administration summary, Bresler was deemed a public figure, and Gottlieb, as a lawmaker, may criticize her publicly and address issues tied to the October 7 attacks and the events that led to them. The court said such statements lie at the core of parliamentary activity and therefore benefit from wide immunity, even if they are expressed harshly.
At the same time, Haimovich said there was a “unique set of circumstances” surrounding some of Gottlieb’s factual publications. He noted that Supreme Court precedent has held that deliberately exposing the identity of a security service employee is not covered by parliamentary immunity. In this case, the judge said, the publication was not made in a neutral security context, but amid claims about Bresler’s husband’s ties to Bresler, to wartime issues, and to her meeting with the head of the Mossad.
The disputed publications included Gottlieb’s claim that Bresler’s husband, a Shin Bet officer, was allegedly connected to various events and figures, and her disclosure of his identity despite the Shin Bet law banning such exposure. The court said those claims cannot yet be treated as fully immune, so the civil case will continue. It stressed that this ruling concerns civil defamation law and immunity for lawmakers, while criminal immunity issues are handled by the Knesset under the Immunity Law.
