Caselaw

Civil Case (Center) 4585-02-19 Ephraim Naveh v. Hadas Steif - part 2

October 5, 2026
Print

12-34-56-78 Chekhov v.  State of Israel, P.D.  51 (2)      The information was given to the investigative unit and the broadcast of the investigative program was frozen.  The information produced from the phones led to a criminal investigation into the affair known as "sex for appointment".  Naveh was suspected of taking advantage of his position and public status to promote the interests of women with whom he was in relationships, especially in the matter of the candidacy of former judge Etti Kreif (hereinafter - Craif).  On January 16,2019, with the outbreak of the open investigation and the partial lifting of the gag order, a special broadcast was broadcast on Army Radio regarding Naveh's case.

  1. In December 2019, the State Attorney's Office announced that it would consider indicting Naveh on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, and Kareef for bribery and destruction of evidence, subject to a hearing. Following the hearings, the Deputy State Attorney decided in March 2021 not to indict Naveh for bribery, fraud, and breach of trust.  The decision was based on evidentiary difficulty in proving that the intimate relationship existed in order for Naveh to act to appoint Kareef to the judiciary, as well as due to the issue of fairness related to the manner in which the evidence was obtained, which was produced in severe violation of Naveh's privacy.  A similar decision was made in Craif's case, and she resigned from the bench.
  2. According to Naveh's claim in the lawsuit, Shteif took his cell phones illegally, without his permission and without his knowledge. Shteif knew that these were Naveh's personal devices.  Despite this, she caused the cell phones to be hacked, with the help of "security experts".  Shteif reviewed the content produced from the cell phones, with a severe violation of Naveh's privacy.  Afterwards, the information was brought before the other defendants: Defendant 2 - Razi Barkai (hereinafter - Barkai), the person who presented the current affairs program "What's Burning" on Army Radio; Defendant 3 - Nurit Canetti (hereinafter - Caneti) the editor-in-chief of the program "What's Burning"; Defendant 4 - Ilil Shachar (hereinafter - Dawn) Director of the Current Affairs Department at Army Radio; Defendant 5 - Shimon Elkabetz (hereinafter - Elkabetz) the commander of Army Radio and the editor-in-chief of defendant 6 - is the Galei Tzahal station (hereinafter - Army Radio).

 

  1. Parts of the information were exposed in various media, including a broadcast on the radio station Galei Tzahal. The defendants broadcast a "special broadcast" in Naveh's case.  In this framework, threats and promises were published to publish more information.  This is not an accidental violation of privacy, but rather a deliberate act of hacking into Naveh's cellular devices and digging into a person's private and personal information.

As a result, Naveh suffered millions of shekels in damages: some for pecuniary damage to his source of income, some for damage to his privacy and good name, and some for pain and suffering caused to him.  For these damages, Naveh petitioned in the present lawsuit to require the defendants to pay compensation in the amount of more than ILS 7 million by virtue of the following grounds: invasion of privacy, publication of defamation, negligence, and breach of statutory duties.

Previous part12
3...67Next part
Skip to content