Court bars Netanyahu’s chief-of-staff’s departure for UK envoy post, reinstates restrictions

Judge Michael Karshen accepted the police appeal against a lower court decision that had largely lifted the conditions imposed on Braverman, who is under investigation.

The Lod District Court on Tuesday reinstated sweeping restrictions on Tzachi Braverman, the prime minister’s chief of staff, including a renewed travel ban that prevents him from leaving Israel to assume his post as ambassador to the United Kingdom, ruling that the suspicion against him has “significantly strengthened” in recent weeks.

Judge Michael Karshen accepted the police appeal against a lower court decision that had largely lifted the conditions imposed on Braverman, who is under investigation on suspicion of obstruction of justice, conveying classified information as a public servant, and fraud and breach of trust.

Braverman’s appointment as ambassador to the UK was approved in December 2025, before the investigation became public. According to the court decision, his letter of appointment was signed on December 9, 2025.

He has since taken preparatory steps toward assuming the diplomatic role, according to a source familiar with the matter.

The investigation centers on a late-night meeting on October 5, 2024, at the Kirya in Tel Aviv between Braverman and Eli Feldstein, a former Prime Minister’s Office spokesman, who is currently facing charges in two separate affairs linked to the Prime Minister’s Office – the so-called “Qatargate” case and the Bild document leak case.

According to the suspicion detailed in the ruling, Braverman informed Feldstein of an ongoing investigation by the IDF into the leak of a document to the German newspaper Bild, showed him a list of names, and asked whether the investigation was connected to him and “to us.” He allegedly added that if the probe was related to the Prime Minister’s Office, he could “turn it off.”

The investigation became overt on January 11, 2026, approximately three weeks after Feldstein publicly described the meeting in a televised interview.

Following his initial questioning, Braverman was released under conditions that included removal from the Prime Minister’s Office and the Kirya compound, a prohibition on contacting individuals connected to the case, and a 30-day travel ban.

The Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court later significantly eased those restrictions, leaving in place only a limited no-contact order. Police appealed, and in mid-January the district court reinstated broader limitations, including a defined list of individuals within the Prime Minister’s Office whom Braverman was barred from contacting.

Earlier this month, however, the magistrate’s court again curtailed the restrictions, canceling the travel ban and narrowing the no-contact order. In doing so, the lower court weighed the potential diplomatic impact of preventing Braverman from taking up his post in London, noting that Britain was “awaiting his arrival” and referencing the broader security climate.

Karshen sharply rejected that approach.

In Tuesday’s decision, he wrote that after reviewing the investigative material, the reasonable suspicion against Braverman had not weakened but had “significantly strengthened,” including in the days following the lower court’s ruling.

He further held that the investigative unit was proceeding at an appropriate pace and had presented a structured investigative plan, contradicting the lower court’s finding that police had failed to identify concrete actions Braverman could disrupt.

On the issue of contact restrictions, Karshen ruled that the broader list of individuals – including the prime minister, the military secretary, advisers, spokespeople, and staff members – was necessary to reduce the risk of interference in an investigation that involves numerous individuals linked to Braverman’s professional environment.

Braverman’s travel may harm investigation

The most consequential part of the ruling concerns the travel ban.

Karshen emphasized that the right to leave Israel is constitutionally protected under laws that explicitly authorize courts to impose such restrictions when necessary to prevent obstruction of justice.

He rejected the defense’s argument that travel bans are justified only where there is a concrete risk of flight, citing precedent that such measures may also address concerns of obstruction.

The judge found that Braverman’s presence abroad – particularly as Israel’s ambassador in a “significant country such as Britain,” while remaining connected to the governmental apparatus from which he was removed – could create a substantial risk of interference with the investigation.

Karshen also dismissed the lower court’s consideration of potential harm to Israel-UK relations as a factor in lifting the ban, ruling that judges handling bail and release proceedings are tasked with balancing investigative needs against the suspect’s rights, not broader foreign policy concerns.

Any diplomatic ramifications, he suggested, should be addressed within the relevant administrative frameworks, including proceedings already underway before the Civil Service Commission regarding Braverman’s status.

The district court ordered that until February 24, 2026, Braverman remain barred from entering the Prime Minister’s Office and the Kirya, from contacting specified individuals, and from leaving the country. He is also required to post a NIS 5,000 personal bond.