

October 7 intelligence officer fights to keep his identity secret

The Gaza Division's intelligence officer on October 7, 2023, Lt. Col. A., is expected to petition the Supreme Court in the coming days in an effort to prevent the publication of his full name and the disclosure of the petition in which he presented his version of the failures surrounding the massacre, Galei Zahal (Army Radio) reported.
Lt. Col. A. is simultaneously waging a legal battle against the decision to dismiss him from the IDF. He is the only officer whom the IDF Chief of Staff decided to dismiss over the events of October 7, but he is still serving in the military and has refused to retire as required.
The separate legal proceeding concerns a District Court decision permitting the publication of his full name and the petition he filed.
In that petition, he presents his account of the events and the failures of October 7, in which he was involved by virtue of his position as the Gaza Division's intelligence officer.
The IDF informed the court that there was no security impediment to publishing the former intelligence officer's name. The court accepted that position and permitted publication, but granted Lt. Col. A. a stay allowing him to appeal to the Supreme Court before the decision takes effect.
In its ruling, the District Court determined that this was "a clear case in which the public interest outweighs every other consideration or interest, and therefore it would be appropriate for his name and identifying details to be published."
Lt. Col. A. completed his role as the Gaza Division's intelligence officer approximately two years ago, but continues to serve in the IDF and has not yet been formally dismissed. According to Galei Zahal, he continues to receive a salary and a vehicle from the military, while his name remains under a publication ban.
Galei Zahal noted that most of the other intelligence officers dismissed from the IDF have already ended their service and had their full names published.
Lt. Col. A., by contrast, continues his legal battle to remain in the military while simultaneously seeking to prevent the disclosure of his identity and the details of his account of the events.