A new Bill has been proposed to give the rabbinate new powers to investigate the ‘Jewish status’ of any Israeli citizen.
(photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
A new bill proposal could see a dramatic depositing of power in the hands of the Rabbinate on matters of Jewish identity, marriage, and aliyah. With the political and national turmoil smacking the country this week, this law could’ve easily flown under the radar.
The bill, submitted by the Religious Services Ministry and the Rabbinical Courts, is an official government initiative and is expected to soon reach the Knesset for discussion and a first reading vote.
The three-pronged proposal rests on severing a legal divide that has been set in place in the State of Israel since its founding: That between civil and religious authorities. The Jerusalem Post queried the Religious Services Ministry on the matter.
The proposal would grant the Chief Rabbinate and its courts authority to initiate investigations into the Jewish status of any Israeli citizen, even if that person has not requested such a review.
ITIM – The Jewish Life Advocacy Center, explained that this could create a new category of “conditional Jews.”
Under current practice, only individuals who wish to marry through the Rabbinate, or who voluntarily seek to clarify their Jewish status (birur yahadut), open such proceedings. The new measure would reverse that principle: Rabbis authorized to register marriages – more than a hundred across the country – or Rabbinical Court officials could trigger an inquiry on their own initiative.
Supporters of the bill say it would help clarify cases of uncertainty and ensure the halachic integrity of Jewish personal-status issues. Ohad Weigler, the public policy center manager at ITIM, warned that it could easily become a tool of harassment or revenge, enabling individuals to damage reputations or disrupt life events such as weddings.
Reforms might not resolve uncertainty
Jewish-status investigations are often complex and emotionally fraught. Proof, according to the Rabbinate’s stringent evidentiary standards, can be extremely difficult to provide, especially for descendants of immigrants from the former Soviet Union, whose family documentation was often lost or incomplete. Although the vast majority of cases already end positively – with fewer than 5% rejected – the process itself can be traumatic. Rabbi Seth Farber, who heads ITIM, said, “It opens the door to an inquisition.”
“It’s deeply painful for people who have considered themselves Jews all their lives to suddenly be told they must ‘prove’ it again,” said Weigler, arguing that the reform would institutionalize suspicion rather than resolve uncertainty. Many, after facing rejection or bureaucratic hardship, ultimately abandon the process or turn to civil marriage abroad.
Farber explained further, “We’ve already demonstrated, beyond a shadow of doubt, that the Department of Jewishness Investigations [in the Rabbinate] is corrupt and certainly not professional in the way they handle things.”
He continued, “We’ve had tens of cases that we’ve appealed to the higher courts, and they’ve reprimanded the lower rabbinical courts for not doing their jobs when it comes to Jewish investigations.” The higher rabbinical courts discovered that the lower regional courts “were just rubber-stamping the decisions of the impressions made upon the investigators.”
“They are not acting in the interest of halacha,” Farber said.
A second element of the bill would restore to rabbinical judges the authority to summon “third parties” – relatives of someone under review – for their own hearings on Jewish status.
Until a 2021 High Court of Justice ruling curtailed the practice, judges often listed family members’ names and ID numbers in Jewish-status files, effectively placing them under suspicion as well. The Court found no legal basis for such measures, and the practice largely disappeared, though, ITIM noted, not completely. The new proposal would re-empower rabbinical courts to do so, arguing that it is necessary to “clarify the truth” and prevent intermarriage mistakes.
The danger, ITIM explained, is that this violates the basic democratic principle that the state must not impose religious inquiries upon its citizens. “In a democracy, the burden of proof lies with the individual, not with the regime,” Weigler warned, calling the measure an attempt to reverse judicial oversight and formalize what the High Court already ruled illegal.
Farber explained, “They actually believe that they’re doing something good for the Jewish people. They see their role as to weed out people whose Jewishness is questionable.”
But, this “doesn’t only undermine the very ethos of the state of Israel, it also undermines the ethos of halacha, because halacha, when it comes to personal status, is based on status quo [chazaka in Hebrew], the presumption that unless we prove otherwise, there’s no reason to start opening up Pandora’s boxes.”
He added, “If you go back enough generations, to the one above Abraham, at that point, no one’s Jewish. But we don’t do that, because that’s not the way Judaism works.”
Beyond marriage, decisions by the Rabbinate on Jewish identity reverberate across multiple government registries. Israel today effectively operates two parallel systems: a civil registry, where Jewish identity is defined by the standards of the Population and Immigration Authority; and a halachic registry, governed by the Rabbinate, which controls marriage and divorce.
The third aspect of the proposal states that only positive determinations by the Rabbinate – cases where a person is confirmed Jewish – would be shared with civil authorities. A negative finding, it claims, would remain internal. But legal experts and advocacy groups warn that once such a halachic standard exists in law, it will inevitably influence the civil system as well.
“Itim sees the danger line being crossed,” Weigler said. “Even if the government promises not to apply negative rulings beyond the Rabbinate, in practice it will blur the boundary between religious and civil identity – eventually narrowing who is recognized as Jewish for the purposes of marriage, immigration, and even the Law of Return.”
The groups this would mostly affect are those that might have a harder time meeting the Rabbinate’s standards of Jewish status, while the conditions for aliyah itself, based on the Right of Return, are less strict, like descendants of immigrants from states in the former Soviet Union.
ITIM argued that the bill represents a broader attempt by the Rabbinate to consolidate control over all aspects of Jewish identity, with far-reaching implications for Diaspora Jewry and immigration to Israel. “It’s against the ethos of the state of Israel as a refuge for all Jews, but it’s also against the ethos of halacha itself,” said Farber.
As reported by The Jerusalem Post