i24NEWS Responds to Third-Party Notice in Netanyahu Defamation Suit
The i24NEWS channel has asked a court to dismiss a third-party notice filed by attorney Eliad Shraga in a defamation lawsuit launched by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over comments made during a broadcast.
An ongoing defamation lawsuit filed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against attorney Eliad Shraga has seen a new development, as the i24NEWS channel submitted its response to the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court. The network has asked the court to dismiss the third-party notice filed against it by Shraga.
The Origin of the Dispute
The legal battle stems from an interview Shraga gave last year on i24NEWS during the program "Kabinet Shishi" hosted by Noga Daromi. During the broadcast, Shraga claimed that Netanyahu "woke up with 25 million shekels in his pocket" in connection with the submarine affair. In response, Netanyahu filed a 160,000-shekel defamation lawsuit against the attorney in April 2025.
In its court filing, i24NEWS argued that responsibility for the statements rests entirely on Shraga himself, noting that the remarks were expressed in his own voice, name, and initiative during a journalistic interview where he was invited to share his views on public matters within his professional expertise.
Shraga's Defense and Third-Party Notice
Shraga subsequently filed a statement of defense, maintaining that his comments relied on the factual framework discussed in the submarine and share-holding affairs, while also filing a third-party notice against the channel operators. He requested that if he is ordered to pay damages to Netanyahu, the network should indemnify him in full, citing the editing process and the manner in which the interview was broadcast.
"The statements were made by the defendant himself, in his own name, voice, and initiative, during a journalistic interview," i24NEWS stated in its response to the court.
Judge Amir Dahan previously rejected Shraga's motion to dismiss the lawsuit outright, ruling that prior administrative proceedings did not thoroughly examine the specific financial allegations against Netanyahu on their merits, thereby requiring the legal proceedings to continue.
