Israel: Information on the new immigrants from the former Soviet Union and the Israel Religions Action Centre (IRAC)

The following information was provided during a 26 May 1996 interview with the director of the Israel Religions Action Centre (IRAC) in Jerusalem.

Criteria for Accepting and/or Refusing Complaints

        Three areas have been established where legal services are provided free of charge to the new immigrants. One is the whole area of the entitlement to make Aliyah and "who is a Jew?" The second is in issues concerning immigrants' rights, mainly immigrants vis-à-vis the bureaucracy. This includes issues relating to housing, the Ministry of Housing, mortgage banks, medical plans, the Ministry of Absorption, and absorption baskets. The third area is where the new immigrant faces difficulties and exploitation resulting from his vulnerability as a new immigrant. This includes issues that come up as a result of lack of knowledge of the language or, in general, the economic pressure that the new immigrant is under. And this latter raises issues — especially of rental or sale of housing, or employment. Now, within these three categories assistance would be rendered free of charge, provided that it is not felt that the new immigrant is unjustifiably trying to take advantage of our service or that there is any difficulty accepting his version as representing the truth. Unlike a commercial attorney who would take on a case regardless of whether his client is telling the truth or not, it is felt that there has to be merit to the request. Therefore, in cases where an applicant lies, the person may be turned down. But there have been cases where the whole truth was not disclosed, yet the issues were deemed to be justifiable and help was given.

Example of Rejected Cases

        There was a doctor from Russia who came to Israel and at the time medical doctors from Russia were required to take an examination to qualify to practise medicine in Israel. He failed the examination. Later on the criteria were changed and doctors who had a certain degree of practice in Russia prior to coming to Israel were exempt from this exam.

Had he come at a later stage when these new criteria were already in effect he would not have had to take the exam. Now, what do you do? Do you represent that newcomer regardless of the fact that he has failed and claim that he should be treated according to the later criteria? Or do you refrain from taking that case on because had he come later he would have been exempted, nevertheless he had taken an exam and was proven to be either incompetent or otherwise unsuited. This is a dilemma currently being deliberated.

There have been cases where a new immigrant who married through a proxy marriage in Paraguay wishes to have new immigrant rights given to his spouse. The Minister of the Interior is sensitive to instances where such proxy marriages were an avenue to introduce illegitimate unions; with Russian immigrants a certain numbver of marriages are with prostitutes who are not Jewish and who otherwise would not have been able to come to Israel under the Law of Return. Someone involved with running a prostitution ring has provided for a fictitious proxy marriage in Paraguay. As a result of such instances the Minister of the Interior has become very sensitive and refuses to automatically grant spousal rights to new immigrants and requires a period to time to verify the authenticity of the marriage and to see whether the couple actually has a family household.

A request to challenge this was refused because it was felt that under the circumstances, there was very little chance of challenging that practice. And it had some merit to it as well. That individual took his case elsewhere and from what has been learned afterward has challenged it in court and failed because the court sided with the Minister of the Interior and their right, under such circumstances, to verify the authenticity of the marriage prior to granting Oleh status.

New immigrants and Identity Cards

        New immigrants are not required to present identity cards as a prerequisite for getting counselling although their identity is verified by the identity card. In general, the presentation of the identity card is required only when one is required to establish his or her identity as when you open up a bank account. In Israel, drivers licenses do not have pictures on them and people establish their identity with the use of an identity card, usually the Teudat Zehut. People who want to cash a cheque, open a bank account or receive certain rights from different government agencies will be required to present their identity card. Other than that, for normal everyday acts that do not involve a formal requirement for establishing identity, the identity card is not required.

There are some instances where all new immigrants and veteran Israelis are required to present their identity card . For example, if someone has lost their driver's license and wants to find out how to get a new one, they have to show their identity card before they get any information. At the Licensing Bureau of the Ministry of Transport, for example, the identity card is required at every instance.

Usually, when one negotiates rental of an apartment, the landlord would not require the identity card. But when the contract is signed and there is need to establish the identity of the parties then, if it were a lawyer who was formulating or drafting the agreement and having the parties sign, it is necessary that any person not known personally to the lawyer shows their identity card. If there should be a breach of contract and a later need for legal recourse and you have not established your identity, and the I.D. number is registered in the contract, then you have acted negligently and committed an act of malpractice.

Program for new immigrants

        Counselling and representation is provided by IRAC to new immigrants from the former soviet union. Some cases are resolved by phone consultation, others through face-to-face counselling or legal counselling; in other cases, correspondence on behalf of the applicant resolved the issue; and in numerous cases the problem has been taken to the courts, to the labour courts, to the district court, court of justice, and in some cases even to the Supreme Court.

Quota for Russian immigrants

        Our organization has never heard of a quota to limit the number of ex-Soviet immigrants coming to Israel. The only known quota, which is currently being challenged, concerns a relatively new phenomenon from Ethiopia: the problem of those who converted to Christianity in previous decades. There was a big debate and legal controversy as to their entitlement to come in under the Law of Return and they are now able to come to Israel. The claim that the Israeli authorities are making is that this limitation is set by the Ethiopian government. The source of the limitation is being looked into and if it is something that the Israeli government could change, we certainly would like it to be changed. There are no such quotas set on new immigrants from the former Soviet Union or Eastern Europe.

Had there been such a quota, it would be a basis for legal action which would have succeeded immediately.

Unwillingness to Settle in Israel

        As a rule, new citizenship is linked very closely with one's move to Israel. Israeli citizenship is not a theoretical statement. It was only so in later years with regard to the refuseniks who could not exit the former Soviet Union because of limitations set on exit visas by the Russian authorities. And in a demonstrative way Israel granted them Israeli citizenship while they were still in Russia. This is something that was done in recent years in order to demonstrate and to symbolically enable the individual who wished to settle in Israel but could not do so because of the limitations set by the Russian authorities. Both the individual and Israel hoped that this symbolic link with Israel through the granting of citizenship would, at a later stage, be remedied by that person being able to come out of Russia.

The Law of Return provides that a new immigrant's visa will be given to any Jew who has expressed his or her wish to settle in Israel. If a person does not wish to settle in Israel there are no grounds for asking for a new immigrant's visa. Therefore, if a person were to make known his or her intention of not settling in Israel and wished to receive his early citizenship as some kind of formal camouflage, or attempt to obtain certain other benefits that emanate from having Israeli citizenship, Israel will not play along with the illegitimate attempt. Israeli citizenship is part of the concept of the Law of Return. A right to return to the homeland was established and recognized by the international community. This brought about the establishment of the State of Israel. So, if one does not truly want to return, then it is justified to deny that person Israeli citizenship.

This does not mean that once a person comes to Israel and settles here and then leaves that the citizenship is revoked. To revoke Israeli citizenship once you receive it is a very complicated process which is rarely done. Usually it has to do with that individual expressing the will to cease being an Israeli citizen because he changed his residence and wants to sever his relationship with Israel. We know of cases where new immigrants came here, received Israeli citizenship, received the absorption basket and other financial benefits and then left. In some extreme cases, periodical payments continue coming into their accounts while they were already residing overseas and actually never intended on settling in Israel.

Problems of the Christians

        These are not on the governmental level but at the societal level. Some circles in the society may not be as tolerant or as open-minded about intermarried families, or about individuals of Jewish descent who have adopted Christianity. The Israeli society is a highly segregated society with Jewish neighbourhoods and Jewish villages and Jewish settlements as well as non-Jewish neighbourhoods and settlements and villages. The degree of integration is very little. Generally, Christians do not face any degree of ridicule or antagonism or discrimination. There may be friction, but concretely speaking I have not received claims that a person wearing the cross will somehow be discriminated against.

Conversion to Judaism

        There are obstacles that new immigrants face in the formal established circles as legal recognition is granted only to Orthodox functionaries and to Orthodox rabbis. Therefore, the only recognized avenue for conversion in Israel that is open to new immigrants is through the Orthodox avenues. Last November, there was a landmark victory in the Supreme Court. A majority of six to one of the Justices of the Supreme Court accepted our argument and ruled the legal basis by which the authorities refused to recognize reform as well as conservative conversions to be null and void, to be inapplicable. But it did not go the next step and order that all non-conservative conversions be recognized. There is now great political pressure which will clearly manifest itself the day after the elections to undo the Supreme Court ruling and block that potential opening up of the area of conversion to include the non-orthodox movements.

So even if such conversions were recognized they would be recognized only for the purpose of population registry but not for the purpose of marriage. These individuals would not be able to marry in Israel unless Israel's marriage laws are changed.

Currently legal recognition is granted only to Orthodox conversions in Israel. The problem is that they would be facing the general sentiment and policy of the Orthodox regime. The conversion is conditioned by the acceptance of an observant mode of life, mainly home and family observance, or for instance, the laws of Sabbath, dietary laws and giving religious education to the children and the like.

New immigrants may have problems getting the rabbinate authorities to convert them unless they lie their way through because most of them are neither willing nor likely to adopt an observant, orthodox way of life. They would have difficulties to cross the threshold of getting converted in the first place. Finally, we recently came across immigrants who after a prolonged process were converted. But when they returned to their secular kibbutz where they resided, the court summoned them and revoked their conversion on the basis that they had gone back to their second kibbutz which they saw as being in conflict with maintaining a religious mode of life. There were a number of other cases in which conversions were revoked on the basis of partial or limited Jewish religious observance.

So the difficulties can be classified in two categories: One is receiving the consent to convert, and two is the threat of having the conversion nullified if they maintain a non-observant lifestyle.

This Response was prepared after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the DIRB within time constraints. This Response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum.

Reference

Director, Israel Religions Action Centre (IRAC), Jerusalem. 26 May 1996. Interview.