Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for an investigation into the creators of the documentary film “NAZA,” accusing them of violating information security rules and harming the country’s interests. He made the statement in a post on the social media platform X.
Netanyahu appealed to the Chief of the General Staff, the head of Israel’s domestic security service, Shin Bet, and the attorney general, demanding a comprehensive investigation and that those involved in the film be held accountable. He accused them of serious violations in the field of information security, defamation, and attempting to harm Israel’s political and security interests.
According to the prime minister, the film presents a false, misleading, and biased narrative that discredits Israel and its military on the international stage and damages the country’s reputation.
“NAZA” received a special jury prize at this year’s Venice Film Festival. The 80-minute film explores the use of artificial intelligence-powered systems in Gaza to target Palestinians and carry out mass killings. Its premiere at the festival was followed by 25 minutes of applause.
In the film, Israeli military personnel and intelligence officers discuss an artificial intelligence system known as “Lavender.” According to interviewees who spoke on condition of anonymity, the system is used to monitor Palestinians’ telecommunications in Gaza and make decisions about targeted killings.
At the heart of this story is not only the film’s content but also the question of how public testimonies about technologies used during military operations should be assessed. When a film relies on accounts from anonymous military and intelligence personnel, it is difficult for the public to independently verify the completeness and accuracy of the information presented. At the same time, this does not eliminate the need to examine those accounts.
Netanyahu’s demand also brings the question of an investigation into the legal sphere. It remains necessary to distinguish between the prime minister’s accusations, the claims presented in the film, and the findings of any potential investigation. These are not the same thing. Future developments will hinge on what evidence is presented to support the alleged violations and whether an investigation establishes the circumstances necessary to assess the legality of the filmmakers’ actions.
