Gofman accuses AG acting in bad faith in case against his appointment as Mossad head

Baharav-Miara raised concerns over meetings between Gofman and a senior Mossad official, appearing to believe it may have been intended to influence outcome of case against him

Roman Gofman, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pick to lead the Mossad, accused Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara of acting in bad faith on Friday, after she raised concerns with the High Court of Justice over a recent meeting he held with an official from the spy agency.

The Attorney General’s Office filed a notice with the court Thursday morning informing it of two meetings he held with officials in the Mossad after his appointment as the next head of the spy agency was approved, which the legal officials said Gofman should have told the court in the framework of the petitions against him.

The court quickly dismissed the attorney general’s concerns, however, saying the meetings and what was discussed in them had no relevance or influence on the petitions before the court, or its decisions thus far in the legal proceedings.

Gofman’s lawyer, responding to Baharav Miara in another notice filed with the High Court, asserted that her account of a recent meeting between his client and a senior Mossad official was “not true (to put it lightly).”

“It is very unfortunate that the attorney general, who is supposed to be a [democratic] gate-keeper, is not acting in good faith toward an IDF major general,” the lawyer said, referring to Gofman. “There isn’t room here to elaborate and detail all the procedural flaws [Baharav-Miara] has caused.”

Gofman was appointed as the next head of the Mossad in April this year, but several petitions were filed against him, including one by a blogger whom Gofman had authorized to publish classified information in a social media influence campaign while he was serving as the commander of the IDF’s 210th Division.

The blogger, Ori Elmakayes who was 17 at the time, was subsequently arrested and indicted for espionage and was only exonerated 18 months later, during which time Gofman did not inform the Shin Bet or the prosecution services that Elmakayes had been cooperating with the IDF.

Gofman was investigated by the IDF and given a disciplinary note in his record over the incident, although due to the fact that he had denied knowledge of the influence operation and not for his failure to intervene for Elmkayes, or for the fact that Elmakayes had been a minor at the time.

The petitions against Gofman’s appointment as Mossad head charge that the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee, which approved his candidacy, failed to properly address Gofman’s role in this incident, particularly if he lied to the IDF’s investigation team.

Following a hearing on Tuesday, the High Court ordered the former head of the Military Intelligence Directorate’s Operational Division, who knew about the Elmakayes affair, to file an affidavit to the court to clarify the facts of the incident.

The former intelligence officer, known only as Gimmel, has been accused by the IDF of being involved in failures surrounding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack. He was lent to the Mossad sometime after the Hamas onslaught and has been there since.

In November, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir announced that Gimmel would be ousted from the IDF over his role in the failures. Outgoing Mossad chief David Barnea approved Zamir’s decision and decided that the officer would also end his role in the intelligence agency.

During preparatory meetings for his new position on April 15, Gofman met with the head of the Mossad department in which Gimmel serves and was informed that the former military intelligence officer he would soon be leaving the agency.

Then, on May 12, the day of the High Court hearing on petitions against his appointment but before it took place, Gofman held further meetings with Mossad officials, and told Gimmel’s department head he would “consider the issue” of Gimmel’s departure from the agency.

The Attorney General’s Office appears to have been concerned that Gofman’s comments about Gimmel may have been designed to influence the outcome of the petitions against him, although the comments were made before the High Court issued its order for Gimmel to file an affidavit on the affair.

Harel Arnon, the attorney representing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the petition proceedings, described the information provided by the Attorney General’s Office as “worthless,” and accused Baharav-Miara of filing the request “to create an uproar over nothing,” and to defend her opposition to the appointment.

“A review of the letter reveals that it has one goal: to continue to cast aspersions on Maj. Gen. Gofman, and cause his appointment to be canceled.

“The apparent foot-dragging and delays by the attorney general in fulfilling her duty to submit Gimmel’s affidavit as soon as possible in order to try and cast aspersions, by implication, on Maj. Gen. Gofman is deplorable,” Netanyahu’s attorney wrote to the court.

He also requested that the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee take Gimmel’s affidavit and not the attorney general, who he said could record Gimmel’s account misleadingly.

Although the court dismissed the attorney general’s concerns, it did not agree to the request for the affidavit to be taken by the committee.

Emanuel Fabian contributed to this report.