Jerusalem Post editor-in-chief Zvika Klein was released from house arrest on Thursday. The police questioned him several times over four days on suspicion of having received personal benefits from Qatar in exchange for advancing its interests.
Klein was questioned in connection with the “Qatargate” affair, which alleges connections between Qatar and the Prime Minister’s Office. Specifically, Qatari officials allegedly fed Israeli journalists pro-Qatari messages regarding the Gaza hostage and ceasefire deal.
Qatar has hosted Hamas for years and began to serve as a mediator together with Egypt soon after the October 7 massacre.
The allegations are that Qatar used its influence to prop up its role as mediator while belittling Egypt’s.
Two suspects in the case, Eli Feldstein and Yonatan Urich, on Wednesday provided contradictory testimonies to police, resulting in a confrontation between them.
Feldstein said he had received money from businessman Gil Birger for his work in the Prime Minister’s Office.
Urich said he did not know Birger and had never spoken with him, adding that he had transferred the funds on behalf of Jay Footlik, a lobbyist for Qatar. He cited tax considerations as the motive.
Klein was first interrogated on Monday and was remanded to house arrest. Journalists and commentators, including the Union of Journalists in Israel, expressed shock at the notion of interrogating and holding a journalist without clear and specified charges.
Journalists questioned
On Thursday, Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara said Klein had been summoned for questioning and, during the questioning, said things that might have incriminated him.
Klein was suspected of being part of “the system of receiving benefits from Qatar in exchange for advancing its interests,” Baharav-Miara said without elaborating.
Earlier on Thursday, journalists Shirit Avitan Cohen from Israel Hayom, Nir Dvori from Channel 12, and Suleiman Maswadeh from KAN News were summoned to give testimony to the police regarding their connections to Qatari messaging.
“The law-enforcement system considers ensuring freedom of the press to be of paramount importance,” Baharav-Miara said. “Therefore, the enforcement policy, which has not changed, is to minimize as many situations as possible in which testimony is collected from journalists. In any case, the collection of testimony is done with great caution to preserve freedom of the press.”
In response, representatives of Klein said in a statement: “Klein never received any benefit or anything else from Qatar or from anyone acting on its behalf. His visit to the country was part of his journalistic work alone, and it is for this alone that he was questioned – in contrast to the illegal leaks from the interrogation rooms.”The visit in question took place last year.
“Klein upheld journalistic ethics throughout his coverage of Qatar in the newspaper, including the article he published and in the opinion pieces that followed – some of which took a critical stance on his article, as is customary at a newspaper that values a diversity of opinions,” the statement said.
“Contrary to what the attorney-general’s statement suggests, he was not part of any ‘apparatus.’ Klein is a professional and respected journalist who has received numerous awards for his work, particularly in the field of Diaspora reporting. All of his actions were carried out solely within the framework of the law and in accordance with the protections of journalistic privilege as upheld in clear rulings by the Supreme Court over the years,” it added.
That was what led to his eventual release, the statement said.
On Thursday, the Union of Journalists in Israel held a Zoom meeting to describe the legality of the situation and respond to queries. When the police and the State Attorney’s Office do not act in accordance with procedure, the union calls for the release of the journalist, the union said.
In this case, however, the police and prosecution adhered to the procedure, and all the necessary authorizations were obtained, the union said, adding that all it could do was “indicate to the police and prosecution that we are monitoring the situation and making sure the journalist receives the special treatment he is entitled to under the law.”
It was legally permissible to interrogate a journalist, the union said, but it should be with full respect for the journalist’s rights.
Placing Klein under house arrest was a mega event that could impact freedom of the press, the union said. Summoning a journalist is extremely unusual and dangerous and must only be done as a last resort, it said.
Sarah Ben-Nun contributed to this report.