Law of Return.html
 
| ca | de | en | es | fr | it | nl | no | pl | pt | ru | ro | fi | sv | tr | vo |


 

This article is about the right of return in Israel. For the equivalent laws in other countries, see Right of return.
The Law of Return is also another name for the Wiccan Rule of Three
Israel

This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
Israel
Other countries · Atlas
 Politics Portal
view • talk • 
Aliyah to Israel and settlement • עלייה
Pre-Zionist Aliyah
Prior to the founding of Israel
After the founding of Israel
Concepts
People/Organizations involved
Related topics

Jewish history • Jewish diaspora • History of the Jews in the Land of Israel • Yishuv • History of Zionism (Timeline) • Revival of Hebrew language • Religious Zionism • Haredim and Zionism • Anti-Zionism
v • d • e

The Law of Return (Hebrew: חוק השבות, ḥok ha-shvūt) is Israeli legislation, originating in 1950, that gives Jews, being those with a Jewish mother or grandmother, or a spouse of such a Jew, or a convert to Judaism (Orthodox, Reform, or Conservative — not secular — though Reform and Conservative conversions must take place outside the state, similar to civil marriages) the right to migrate to and settle in Israel and gain citizenship.

Contents

Law

On July 5, 1950, the Knesset, Israel's Parliament enacted item 5710-1950, the Law of Return.[1] Follow-up legislation on immigration matters as they pertain to Jews and non-Jews is enshrined in the Nationality Law passed in 1952. These two pieces of legislation combine religion, history, nationalism, and democracy, in a way unique to Israel. Together, the legislation grants special rights to Jews with the aim of facilitating their immigration to the Jews' ancestral homeland.

The Law of Return declares that Israel constitutes a home not only for the inhabitants of the State, but also for all members of the Jewish people everywhere - be they living in poverty and fear of persecution or in affluence and safety.

Purpose

The purpose of the Law of Return, like that of the Zionist Movement, was to provide a solution to the Jewish people's problem--to re-establish a home for the entire Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel. In the Law of Return, the State of Israel put into practice the Zionist Movement's "credo" as pledged in Israel's Declaration of Independence and recognized by the League of Nations in 1922, when charging Britain with the duty of establishing a Jewish National Home, and by the United Nations within the Partition Plan of 1947 which provided for establishment of Israel as an independent Jewish state.

A religious and cultural vision

Jewish immigration to "Eretz Israel" (The Land of Israel) was not only seen as the fulfillment of a religious cultural vision, but was portrayed as the only viable option for Jews seeking refuge from anti-Semitic persecution. While other states had denied the mass immigration of Jewish refugees, Zionist advocates in Palestine worked to make a tangible political reality out of the yearning for a Jewish homeland, putting it forward as an immediate means for continued survival.

Eligibility requirements

Those who are eligible to immigrate under the Law of Return are immediately granted citizenship. Controversy has arisen as to whether all those claiming citizenship rights under the Law of Return should be registered as "Jewish" citizens for census purposes. Jewish status is traditionally granted according to the halakhic definition of being Jewish-- if your mother is Jewish, you are Jewish as well or if you convert to Judaism (though conversions to Reform and Conservative Judaism streams are generally not recognized by many people in Israel). However, any Jew regardless of affiliation may return and claim citizenship in Israel.

Originally, the Law of Return was restricted to Jews only. A 1970 amendment, however, stated that, "The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of an oleh under the Nationality Law...are also vested in a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew" (Law of Return).

The Nuremberg parallel

One explanation for this amendment is that the Law of Return attempts to provide sanctuary as a citizen in Israel to anyone who would be persecuted under the Nuremberg Laws. As the Nuremberg Laws did not use a halakhic definition in its definition of Who is a Jew, the Law of Return definition for citizenship eligibility is not halakhic, either. The Law of Return provides sanctuary to anyone covered by the definition under the Nuremberg Laws, but does not automatically presume that the person is halakhicly Jewish for the purposes of citizenship laws.citation needed

The demographic explanation

A second explanation is that in order to increase immigration levels so as to offset the "demographic threat" posed by the continuing presence and growth of the Palestinian population, the law expanded the base group of those eligible to immigrate to Israel.[2]

The secular explanation

A third explanation promoted by religious Jews is that the overwhelmingly secular leadership in Israel sought to undermine the influence of religious elements in Israeli politics and society by allowing more secular Jews and their non-Jewish spouses to immigrate.[3]

Exceptions

A Jew can be excluded from Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return if he or she is considered to be dangerous to the welfare of the State of Israel. Jews who have a past that involves a serious crime, such as murder, or who are fugitives in another country for any felony (unless they are labeled such as persecution victims) can be denied the right of return, (e.g. Meyer Lansky, Victor Vancier).[4] Also Jews converting to other religions lose their right to citizenship under the Law of Return, (e.g. Brother Daniel).

Messianic Jews

Specifically excluded from the Law of Return are any "person who has been a Jew and has voluntarily changed his religion.". The Supreme Court of Israel ruled in 1989 that Messianic Judaism constituted another religion, and that Jews who had become Messianic Jews were not therefore eligible for Aliyah. The government of Israel used this ruling to exclude anyone who was a Messianic Jew.[5]

On April 16, 2008, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled in a case brought by a number of people with Jewish fathers and grandfathers whose applications for citizenship had been rejected on the grounds that they were Messianic Jews. The argument was made by the applicants that they had never been Jews according to halakha, and were not therefore excluded by the conversion clause. This argument was upheld in the ruling[6] [7] , and the government agreed to reprocess their applications.

Controversy

Critics claim that the Law of Return runs counter to the claims of a democratic state.[8][9] [10]

Critique of the Law of Return by Palestinians and advocates for Palestinian refugees is often linked to the Palestinian demand for a right of return.[11] The Law of Return, as contrasted against the right of return, is cited by Palestinians and their supporters as a deep offense that amounts to asking them to accept what they see as institutionalized ethnic discrimination that privileges the rights of Jews.[12]

Arguments in support of the Law of Return

  1. The Law of Return is only one way of acquiring citizenship. It is not the only way. There are other ways to acquire citizenship for non-Jews, such as naturalization, residence, or marrying an Israeli citizen; for instance, naturalization is available under certain circumstances for the non-Jewish parents of a citizen who has completed his or her army service[13]. The Law of Return is meant to deal only with the Jewish problem of homelessness and worldwide persecution.[14] [15]
  2. That special privileges are granted to one group (i.e., Jews) does not necessarily or automatically discriminate against another. Jewish foreigners along with their relatives are eligible for "positive" discrimination because they can obtain automatic naturalization. Israel has residency and citizenship laws for non-Jews that are equivalent to those in other liberal democracies. It is argued that these kinds of laws are common and consistent with International Law, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article I(3) which allows for preferential immigration treatment of some groups, provided there is no discrimination against a specific group.[16] Others point to the legal barring of Jews from several Arab states, with Jordan going so far as to enshrine that principle in its constitution.[17][18]
  3. That while the purpose of the Law of Return is to keep Israel predominantly Jewish, the policy that it represents is legitimate and justified. In a world where Jews have been persecuted, the concept of maintaining a Jewish state is necessary for the survival of the Jewish people generally and to provide a safe haven for Jewish refugees in specific cases. Here again, defenders cite the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article I(4), which allows for preferential treatment for some groups in order to remedy past discrimination. [16]
A stamp in a passport issuing holder Israeli citizenship based on Law of Return
A stamp in a passport issuing holder Israeli citizenship based on Law of Return

Similar laws in other countries

In addition to Israel, several other countries (e.g. Germany[19]) provide immigration privileges to individuals with ethnic ties to these countries (so-called leges sanguinis). (See Right of return and Repatriation laws.) These citizenship laws seem to have been enacted by states wishing to guarantee a safe-haven to diaspora populations assumed to be living under precarious conditions.citation needed

A Spanish law decreed under the rule of Miguel Primo de Rivera states that Sephardi Jews have the right to apply for Spanish citizenship. This law was applied to thousands of Holocaust refugees during the Second World War and even to Sarajevo Jews during the War of Bosnia.citation needed

Debate in Israel

In Israel, a debate continues over the Law of Return. Some people wish to retain it as it stands, others want to modify it, and a small minority wants to abolish the Law completely. Those who would abolish the Law believe that it grants Jews rights that members of other groups governed by the State of Israel do not have,[20] a situation which would be contrary to the spirit of a modern liberal democracy. They further claim that although the law did indeed contribute to immigration and absorption when Israel was established, it is no longer needed.citation needed Proponents state that Israel is "Jewish and democratic" not just democratic, that it was established as a Jewish state and a refuge for the Jewish people, not as a pale copy of other world states.citation needed

In September 2007, the discovery of a violent Neo-Nazi cell in Petah Tikva, made up of teenage immigrants from the former Soviet Union, led to renewed calls amongst politicians to amend the Law of Return.[21] Effi Eitam of the National Religious Party and the National Union, which represent the religious Zionist movement and have previously attempted to advance bills to amend the Law of Return, stated that Israel has become "a haven for people who hate Israel, hate Jews, and exploit the Law of Return to act on this hatred."[22] On the other end of the political spectrum, MK Ahmed Tibi of United Arab List and Ta'al criticized the system's double-standard, stating that, "people immigrated to Israel and received automatic citizenship under the Law of Return, while citizens of Nazareth and Taibe are not allowed to visit their own relatives merely due to the fact that they are Arabs."[22]

Applicability

See also Who is a Jew?

Amongst those who are in favor of retaining the Law, controversy exists over its wording. The Law's definition of a "Jew" and "Jewish people" are subject to debate. Israeli and Diaspora Jews differ with each other as groups and among themselves as to what this definition should be for the purposes of the Law of Return. Additionally, there is a lively debate over the meaning of the terms "Jewish State" and "State of the Jews".

Discussion around the Law and its wording constantly reappears on private and public agendas in Israel and in the Diaspora. The Knesset has repeatedly debated proposals to amend the Law of Return, and it has indeed been amended a number of times over the years. These modifications reflect the changes that have taken place in Israeli society, the shifts that have taken place in political dialogue both inside Israel itself, and the political discourse between Israel and the Diaspora. The present law constitutes an expression of permanent trends as well as of the Israeli legislative system's ability to adapt itself to changing circumstances.

It is not only the Knesset, however, which has been repeatedly obliged to directly or indirectly address these issues. Over the years, many of Israel's interior ministers have examined the issue of the Law of Return and wavered as to how to apply it. The judiciary has also been called upon to express an opinion on matters relating to the Law. This burning and recurrent question in the country's political dialogue not only reveals but also exacerbates differences of opinion between Israelis.

One central issue is who has the authority over determining the validity of conversions to Judaism for purposes of immigration and citizenship. For historical reasons, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, under the Israeli Ministry of Religious Affairs, made this determination, but this arrangement is in question. This practice has met opposition among non-Orthodox religious leaders both within Israel and in the diaspora. Several attempts have been made to resolve the issue, the most recent being the Ne'eman Commission, but an impasse persists.

On March 31, 2005, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled 7-4 that all conversions performed outside of Israel would be recognized by the authorities under the Law of Return, notwithstanding the Ne'eman Commission's view that a single body should determine eligibility for immigration. Orthodox religious leaders objected vehemently to this ruling, arguing that it would lead to fraudulent immigration applications.

See also

References

  1. ^ Law of Return 5710-1950
  2. ^ Ian Lustick, "Israel as a Non-Arab State: The Political Implications of Mass Immigration of Non-Jews,” Middle East Journal, 53:3, 101-117, 1999.
  3. ^ Eleonara Poltinnikova-Shifrin. "The Jewish State and the Law of Return." [1] 1 January 2002.
  4. ^ Crime Library.[2]
  5. ^ Israeli Court Rules Jews for Jesus Cannot Automatically Be Citizens - New York Times
  6. ^ "Messianic Ruling". jpost.com. The Jerusalem Post (2008). Retrieved on 2008-04-22. “"the petitioners were entitled to automatic new immigrant status and citizenship precisely because...they were the offspring of Jewish fathers."”
  7. ^ "Messianic Ruling". cbn.com. CBNnews.com (2008). Retrieved on 2008-04-17. “Myers told CBN News, "The bottom line is that if your father is Jewish or if any of your grandparents are Jewish from your father's side - even if you're a Messianic Jew - you can immigrate to Israel under the law of return or under the law of citizenship if you marry an Israeli citizen."”
  8. ^ Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations. "UN Economic, Social and Cultural Committee Expresses Grave Concern Over Israel's Discriminatory Practices." [3] accessed 2 October 2006.
  9. ^ Press Releases: Occupied Palestinian Territory, The international community is bargaining with the rights of the Palestinians
  10. ^ Jonathan Cook. "Hollow Visions of Palestine's Future." [4] November 18, 2006, accessed 23 February 2007.
  11. ^ Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Law of Return. [5]
  12. ^ return.PDF
  13. ^ Sheleg, Y. 2004. "Not Halakhically Jewish: the Dilemma of Non-Jewish Immigrants in Israel." Jerusalem: Israeli Democracy Institute, working paper 51 (in Hebrew)
  14. ^ Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, "Acquisition of Israeli Nationality". [6]
  15. ^ International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination, CERD/C/471/Add.2, 1 September 2005.
  16. ^ a b "From 'Ethnic Cleansing' to Casualty Count, Prof. Qumsiyeh Errs" Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, August 20, 2004.
  17. ^ Why Jews Fled the Arab Countries - Middle East Quarterly
  18. ^ Citizenship legislation in the Syrian Arab Republic | Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ) | Find Articles at BNET
  19. ^ Christian Joppke & Zeev Rosenhek, "Contesting Ethnic Immigration: Germany and Israel Compared", European Journal of Sociology, 43, 301-335, 2003.
  20. ^ Gail J. Boling. "Palestinian Refugees and the Right of Return: An International Law Analysis." [7] Badil Information & Discussion Brief. 1 January 2001.
  21. ^ Rebecca Anna Stoil, Mark Weiss and Matthew Wagner (9 September 2007). "Sheetrit may deport alleged neo-Nazis". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved on 2007-09-10.
  22. ^ a b Roni Singer-Heruti (10 September 2007). "Interior Minister: I'll consider revoking neo-Nazis' citizenship". Ha'aretz. Retrieved on 2007-09-10.

External links
All Right Reserved © 2007, Designed by Stylish Blog.