Netanyahu orders identification and prosecution of IDF Gaza whistleblowers behind ‘Naza’ documentary
A widely circulated still from the documentary “Naza”.
New Delhi: The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has called for the identification and prosecution of military personnel who testified anonymously in “Naza”, an award-winning documentary alleging that large civilian losses were knowingly incorporated into Israeli targeting decisions in Gaza. His intervention escalates a confrontation over the film’s findings, which the Israeli military rejects, and the protection of sources who disclosed information about its operations.
In a letter released by his office on Monday, Netanyahu asked the attorney general, Gali Baharav-Miara, the military’s chief of staff, Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, and the director of the Shin Bet security service, David Zini, to launch a comprehensive investigation. He demanded prosecution over alleged information-security offences, criminal defamation and damage to Israel’s diplomatic and security interests, according to the Jerusalem Post.
Netanyahu accused the documentary of presenting a false account that discredited Israel and its armed forces internationally. His demand sets out the action he wants investigators and prosecutors to take; it does not itself establish that the interviewees committed an offence.
A significant legal qualification had already emerged during the military’s earlier consideration of action against the film. The military advocate general, Major General Itai Ofir, reportedly advised that criminal charges would require security violations or leaks, although breaches of military orders could justify disciplinary proceedings, the Times of Israel reported in September.
As RNA Media had reported in September, directed by the Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, “Naza” features anonymous testimony from 24 military and intelligence personnel about the conduct of the Gaza campaign. The directors previously helped make “No Other Land”, the documentary about Palestinian displacement in the occupied West Bank that won an Oscar in 2025.
The film’s title comes from the Hebrew military term for collateral damage, referring here to estimates of civilian casualties before an attack. Produced by the Guardian and James Wilson, it builds on investigations published by +972 Magazine, the Hebrew-language outlet Local Call and the Guardian between 2023 and 2025, according to the Calgary International Film Festival’s programme.
As RNA Media had explained in its September report, the controversy concerns both technology and the human decisions surrounding its use. Earlier reporting described Lavender, a system used to flag suspected militant affiliations, and “Where’s Daddy?”, a tool reportedly used to track designated individuals when they returned home.
Sources alleged that attacks on suspected operatives at home exposed their families to foreseeable harm, while some target assessments received only brief scrutiny. Those accounts raise questions about the substance of human oversight, but linking a particular system to an individual attack requires evidence beyond establishing that the military possessed the technology.
In its detailed response published on October 1, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) argued that interviewees described limited intelligence roles without understanding subsequent planning and authorization. It maintained that human officers identify and approve targets, operational commanders decide whether to strike, and algorithms do not independently authorize attacks.
The military also rejected a prominent allegation that an operation was approved despite an estimate of 500 civilian deaths. It said civilian-harm estimates inform precautions, changes to attack plans and cancellations, and argued that thresholds requiring higher-level approval should not be confused with permission to kill a specified number of civilians.
The filmmakers defend their verification, saying the wider reporting involved more than 100 confidential sources. The documentary won the special jury prize at the Venice film festival in September, bringing the testimony to an international audience beyond readers of the original investigations.
The pressure on its makers predates Netanyahu’s latest demand: in September, he announced plans for legislation allowing citizenship to be revoked from Israelis accused of defaming Israeli soldiers abroad. The Committee to Protect Journalists condemned that proposal and documented protesters gathering outside Szor’s family home, including chants demanding death sentences for alleged traitors.
The organization warned that threats from senior officials could intimidate journalists and discourage sources from exposing alleged wrongdoing. The latest prosecution demand brings that concern into sharper focus, as the dispute encompasses both the credibility of the military testimony and the consequences of making it public.
