“Gag lawsuit?” Organization promoting “sacred sexuality” sues Israeli for millions

Eyal Shaham, an Israeli who took part in a workshop run by the international organization ISTA, says sexual abuse takes place at the organization’s seminars and warns potential clients not to participate. ISTA has filed a defamation lawsuit against him for 3.6 million shekels, raising the question of whether this is an attempt to silence criticism and bringing the matter to court. Yael Yaffe, N12, published: 10.06.26, 09:20.

Illustration | Photo: AP, News

ISTA, an international New Age organization that runs workshops and seminars on “sacred sexuality,” workshops for personal development that combine spirituality, tantra, shamanism and sexuality, is suing an Israeli, a central critic of the organization, for 3.6 million shekels on the grounds of defamation. The suit concerns publications by Shaham warning about sexual abuse, which he says takes place in the organization’s workshops and seminars.

According to ISTA, the International School of Temple Arts, whose seminars are also held in Israel, and a second plaintiff, senior instructor Lori Handlers, the Israeli, Eyal Shaham, caused them reputational and financial harm. In recent years, journalistic investigations in Israel and around the world have been published about the organization, presenting testimony about sexual abuse that allegedly occurred within it or by its instructors. Among other things, the investigations described practices of sexual relations between workshop facilitators and participants.

About three years ago, the Israeli Center for Cult Victims issued a public statement regarding ISTA workshops, saying that “the center identified concerning characteristics with the potential to harm participants in ISTA activities and in activities of teachers associated with it.”

The defendant, Eyal Shaham

The statement described ISTA’s main workshop, Level 1, as follows: “In a typical activity in the workshop, participants stare at the exposed genitals of several female participants. In another typical activity, group masturbation takes place among the participants, including the staff. The guidance in the workshop is structured so that there is covert to overt pressure for increasing sexual openness that does not necessarily match the participants’ capacity.”

“According to testimony, the ideology emerging from the content conveyed in the workshops links spiritual and mental development with willingness to engage in various sexual experiences, including participation in sexual activity in a group setting and/or collectively. At the climax of the workshop, a ritual is held in which the participants in the group massage the participants’ genitals.”

Advertisement

In response to the statement, ISTA did not deny that there is nudity in the workshops, that participants stare at genitals, and that sexual contact may occur, but argued that the center’s interpretation of what happens in the workshop is distorted and wrong, and that nothing is done under pressure or without consent.

Shaham, who took part in this workshop and later joined the organization’s alumni group on Facebook, argued in his defense statement that he began acting against it after being exposed to content indicating harmful patterns within it and sought to raise awareness of them.

In the complaint, ISTA claims it took steps to create a safe space for seminar participants and denounced instructors who strayed from the rules. Even so, they write, Shaham continued to claim that those instructors continue to operate within the organization.

Shaham is represented pro bono by the Clinic for Law and Social Change at the University of Haifa and the law firm LIPA&CO. According to them, in the defense statement, this is a gag lawsuit and the court should dismiss the claim outright. Alternatively, they asked the court to require ISTA and Handlers to deposit a financial guarantee for the conduct of the proceedings, both because the plaintiffs are not Israeli and, under the law, the court may require foreign companies to post security, and also in reliance on a Supreme Court precedent that set tests for classifying a suit as a gag lawsuit. They demanded that the security equal the amount of the suit, about 3.6 million shekels.

Tel Aviv-Jaffa District Court Judge Idit Ketzvoyi recently partially accepted the request by Shaham’s attorneys. She did not dismiss the suit outright and did not rule that it was a gag lawsuit, but she did, for the first time, apply the criteria of that doctrine when considering the amount of the security the plaintiffs would have to deposit. This was despite the fact that those criteria were originally intended to determine the amount of costs to be awarded to a plaintiff at the end of proceedings involving a lawsuit classified by the court as a gag lawsuit.

The judge ruled that ISTA and Handlers must jointly deposit a financial security of about half a million shekels to proceed with the lawsuit, a sum considered relatively unusual in security determinations.

Advertisement

The lawyers representing Shaham, Reut Cohen and Efrat Lupo Moskovitz of the Clinic for Law and Social Change at the University of Haifa, and Vala Ben-Dor and Noy Matzliach of LIPA&CO, said: “This is an unprecedented and just legal achievement, as well as a huge victory for freedom of expression, making clear that the court will not be used as an instrument to silence public criticism.”

Eyal Shaham said in response: “I did not set out to be a social activist, but when I was exposed to harmful and systematic patterns, especially toward young and vulnerable women, I could not turn a blind eye. After trying to change the system from within and encountering a wall of resistance, I understood that I had a moral and ethical duty to raise public awareness and thereby help as much as I can prevent further harm. Over the years, I was exposed to testimonies, investigations and difficult material pointing to deep rot and systematic harm. The truth and the evidence are stronger than any legal threat, and I will continue to stand with the victims.”

ISTA said in response: “The court rejected the defendant Eyal Shaham’s request that, at this stage, the suit be treated as a ‘gag lawsuit,’ and explicitly ruled in sections 16 and 19 of the decision that ‘there is no place to regard the lawsuit, at such an early stage, as a gag lawsuit.’ The court also rejected the defendant’s extraordinary request to require the plaintiffs to deposit security in the full amount of the claim, about 3.6 million shekels, or a sum close to it, and set the security at a significantly lower amount, dividing it between the two plaintiffs.

“After the decision was issued, the court rejected another request filed by the defendant, in which he sought to determine that this was a gag lawsuit. The defendant’s attempt to again use the media as leverage against ISTA, as he has done for years, will not succeed this time, and we are convinced that the court will take this into account. After years of severe and baseless defamation, ISTA is determined to conduct the proceedings to their conclusion and ensure that Eyal Shaham is held accountable for his actions and his activity over the years.”

Did you find a language error?