What it is about
The Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee ignited debates while discussing the updated Rabbinical Courts Bill (Enforcement of Divorce Rulings), specifically around the contentious definition of “divorce refusal.” This clause, which implies that “divorce refusal” occurs only after a court mandates a divorce and the husband disregards the order, faced opposition from many women’s rights groups.
Why it matters
The issue of divorce refusal is a significant concern in Israel, affecting numerous women who seek to dissolve their marriages but are denied a religious “get.” The initial definition proposed in the bill was not only misleading but could’ve resulted in inadequate legal resources and support for many agunot – Jewish women trapped in marriages against their will. Addressing this issue comprehensively by adopting accurate definitions and enforcing just policies will ensure better support and equity for women in the rabbinical courts.
Key details
All parties including Mavoi Satum, a significant advocate for women’s rights, and other organizations pushed successfully to eliminate the contentious clause from the bill. Without significant public discourse or protest, the detrimental impact of this definition remained largely unnoticed. This under-the-radar alteration stresses the importance of public involvement in legislative processes to guarantee that vulnerable groups are safeguarded.
Illustrative Examples
The case of “Rotem” – a woman stuck administering her divorce proceedings for six years due to her husband’s resistance – exemplifies these shortcomings. Her situation underscores the necessity to reinterpret divorce refusal. It reflects that divorce refusal begins when one party denies providing a get after it is requested, bypassing the need for a formal court order to acknowledge the distress involved.
Fundamental Issues with the Definition
The wrongly crafted definition would limit the recognition of many cases of divorce refusal, thereby failing to provide affected women with necessary and timely assistance. Timely policy reproductive mechanisms should be implemented, wherein halachic and moral obligations are acknowledged broadly, beyond just legal rulings.
Our Take
For divorce refusal to no longer exist, unified efforts from the public, politicians, and judicial authorities in the rabbinical courts are crucial. Legislative accountability and public engagement form the backbone of dynamic changes required to support women’s rights comprehensively and efficaciously in Israel. By holding our systems accountable and aligned with inclusive definitions, we create a supportive infrastructure nurturing justice and equality.
About the writer
The writer volunteers at Mavoi Satum, an organization ardently supporting women’s legal and psychological rights in rabbinical courts, steering towards gender equality and empathetic justice.
This story was first published on jpost.com.