Ruling on Reform & Conservative Conversions
(February 20, 2002)
The Israeli Supreme
Court ruled 9-2 that the Interior Ministry must register as Jews
Israeli citizens who were converted by the Conservative or Reform movements in Israel
or abroad. The ruling sidestepped the question of whether such conversions were valid in Jewish law, relying on precedent
that the population registry must list details regarding
personal status given to it by Israeli citizens without question. This
is the first time the court has ruled on the non-Orthodox conversions
of Israeli citizens. The following is a summary of the court's ruling.
The Supreme Court today
delivered a judgment regarding the question
of whether residents of Israel who have undergone
Reform or Conservative conversion should be
registered as Jews by the Registrar of the
Ministry of the Interior, an official government
body operating under the Population Registration
Act of 1965. Under the Registration Act, a
Jew is defined as "a person born to a
Jewish mother or who has converted to Judaism
and is not a member of another religion."
The identical definition is also used in the Law
of Return, an immigration law which entitles
all Jews to immigrate to Israel. Today's judgment
applies only to the registration issue, and
does not deal with the Law of Return.
The judgment was delivered by a panel of
eleven Justices. The majority opinion was
written by the Chief Justice of the Court,
A. Barak, and was joined by Deputy Chief Justice
S. Levin, and Associate Justices T. Or, E.
Mazza, M. Cheshin, T. Strasberg-Cohen, D.
Dorner, D. Beinisch, and E. Rivlin. Associate
Justice J. Turkel filed a concurring opinion,
and a dissent was filed by Associate Justice
I. Englard.
According to the majority opinion, the outcome
of this issue was governed by the Funk-Schlessinger
case, decided by the Supreme Court in 1963.
According to the Funk-Schlessinger opinion,
the Registrar is a collector of statistical
data. The data gathered by the Registrar concerning
religious and national status carries no evidentiary
weight. In carrying out the task of registering
the religious or national status of residents
of Israel, the Registrar exercises only administrative,
and not judicial, discretion. Accordingly,
under Funk-Schlessinger, the only circumstance
under which the Registrar may refuse to register
a resident who claims to be Jewish is when
it is clear that the applicant's claim is
false. Where there is doubt regarding the
validity of the applicant's claim, the Registrar
must accept the application and register the
claimant as a Jew. The Majority in today's
decision held that although, over the past
thirty-nine years, there have been changes
in the application of the principles enunciated
in Funk-Schlessinger, the holding in that
case still applies to the current issue.
The Majority held that the term "converted",
as it is used in the Registration Act's definition
of a Jew, is ambiguous. There are several
possible interpretations of the term; it may
refer exclusively to Orthodox conversions,
or, alternatively, it may also include Conservative
conversions, Reform conversions, or both.
The Majority refrained from deciding the exact
definition of the term, holding instead that
because there is doubt regarding the meaning
of the term "converted", the Funk-Schlessinger
precedent mandates that the Registrar register
the applicants as Jews. It is therefore important
to emphasize that the Court did not take any
position regarding the validity of Conservative
or Reform conversions.
The Majority's decision was also based on
another important precedent, the Shas decision.
In Shas, the Court held that the Registrar
must register immigrants to Israel as Jews
if they were converted in a Jewish community
abroad prior to their immigration to Israel,
so long as that conversion was recognized
as valid in the community in which it was
performed.
The Court considered not only the case of
first-time registrants, but also instances
in which a resident who is registered as a
non-Jew wishes to change his or her status,
based on a conversion. Under the Registration
Act, such an applicant must submit an official
document, such as a declarative judgment from
a district court, verifying the change in
his or her religious status. The Court decided
that such a declarative judgment should state
that the applicant's conversion took place
in a Jewish community, in Israel or abroad.
The Court, however, did not address the question
of what constitutes a "Jewish community".
The final decision of the Court ordered the
Registrar to register the applicants as Jews
in the National Registry.
The State argued that the holding of Shas
does not apply to conversions within Israel,
since, according to the State, there is only
one legally recognized Jewish community in
Israel. Accordingly, the State argued that
the approval of the Chief Rabbinate is required
in order for conversions of Israeli citizens
to have force. The majority rejected this
claim and held that Israel is not the country
of the "Jewish community", but rather
the country of the Jewish people. Judaism
is comprised of many different denominations
that are active both in Israel and outside
it. A fundamental principle of the constitutional
regime in Israel gives each individual freedom
of religion, freedom of conscience and freedom
of association.
Associate Justice J. Turkel filed a separate
opinion, concurring as to the specific result,
but not as to the reasoning. Justice Turkel
stated that he would have overruled Funk-Schlessinger,
because the act of registering the religious
status of Israeli residents does not have
purely statistical consequences. According
to Justice Turkel, because the overruling
of Funk-Schlessinger would create a "legislative
vacuum", the legislature should provide
a new definition for the term "converted".
In the absence of such a definition, Justice
Turkel would have ordered the Registrar to
cease registering as a Jew anyone who has
undergone conversion. Nevertheless, because
Justice Turkel's opinion only applies prospectively,
he concurred in the Majority's order to register
as Jews the particular applicants in the case
at bar.
Justice I. Englard issued a dissenting opinion.
According to Justice Englard, because the
issues raised in this case are deeply ideological
and political in nature, the Court should
not involve itself in their resolution. Justice
Englard also stated that the term "converted",
as it is used in the Registration Act, refers
only to an Orthodox conversion.
Sources: Israeli
Foreign Ministry, Jerusalem
Post, (February 20, 2002) |