Immigration to Israel for Relatives of Converts to Judaism, Under the Law of Return (“Ger Gorer” Clause)
For the Ethiopian community, Aliyah (immigration to Israel) is not a simple thing. The Ethiopian community is known for its rich Jewish history and strong Zionist sentiments, but also for Israel’s disappointing attitude toward its members, especially regarding Aliyah and the Falash Mura. “Ger Gorer” (i.e., relatives of converts to Judaism being allowed to make Aliyah) is a concept from the Law of Return, subject to legal interpretation, that greatly influenced the Falash Mura immigration: first it allowed most family members of the Falash Mura to immigrate to Israel, and, later, under the new narrow interpretation of the law, caused problems for the Falash Mura themselves regarding immigration to Israel.
The concept of “Ger Gorer” is based on the interpretation of the Law of Return (Amendment No. 2, 1970). Section 4A states: “The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of an oleh under the Nationality Law, 5712–1952, as well as the rights of an oleh under any other enactment, 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, except for a person who has been a Jew and has voluntarily changed his religion.”
The debate revolves around the question of whether or not the term “child of a Jew” requires the child’s father to have been Jewish at the time of the child’s birth in order for the child to be eligible to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return. In other words, may a convert to Judaism (a “Ger”) bring their family to Israel with them (“Gorer”, literally “dragging along”) or must the convert establish a new family that will be entitled to a legal status in Israel?
Our law firm specializes in immigration to Israel. This article by lawyer Michael Decker reviews Israel’s attitude toward the Ethiopian community regarding immigration and conversion to Judaism, and explains how to help relatives in Ethiopia immigrate to Israel in the current situation.
Broad Interpretation and Narrow Interpretation
There is no dispute about the fact that the Falash Mura are descendants of the “Beta Israel” Jewish community who have already immigrated to Israel. But during the previous century, the conditions of the Jews in Ethiopia were unbearable, which forced some of them to convert to Christianity. Many of the city people converted so that they would be allowed to attend higher-education institutions, and even more of the village residents converted to Christianity because it gave them a much higher chance of surviving within the Christian majority.
In 1972, the then Attorney General and later President of the Supreme Court, Meir Shamgar, ruled that the term “child of a Jew” does not refer exclusively to children whose father was Jewish at the time of the child’s birth. Consequently, the right to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return depended on the father’s religion at the time when the child wished to immigrate to Israel, not at the time of the child’s birth. This meant that Falash Mura immigrating to Israel under the Law of Return based on being the child or grandchild of a Jew, and subsequently converting to Judaism, could bring their own children and grandchildren along with them even if those children or grandchildren were not Jews and did not undergo conversion to Judaism. This was the interpretation for about 30 years – until, in 2001, the then Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein, who later also became a Supreme Court judge, changed it.
In a discussion held at the Attorney General’s office at the time, initiated by the Ministry of Interior and other government ministries, it was argued that many of the Falash Mura who convert to Judaism seek, through the conversion process, to grant their relatives rights under the Law of Return, and there are so many of these relatives that they may make up to 70% of the Ethiopian immigrant population.
Therefore, the interpretation of Section 4A in the Law of Return was re-examined, and Rubinstein ruled that anyone who was non-Jewish at the time of birth of their child and later converted to Judaism would not be allowed to bring their child with them when immigrating to Israel (if the parent themselves are, at the most, a Jew’s grandchild and not a Jew’s child), since the child is not considered a Jew’s child or grandchild, and is therefore not entitled to immigrate under the Law of Return. A petition was filed with the Supreme Court against this opinion, but the petition was deleted and Rubinstein’s legal opinion is followed to this day.
Appeals to the Supreme Court Against the New Interpretation of the “Ger Gorer” Clause
In general, the High Court of Justice (HCJ) aligned with this new policy. For example, in April 2014, the HCJ in case 7638/10 rejected a petition filed by Shlomo Elmo Tefera, who immigrated to Israel and converted to Judaism, against the Minister of Interior and the Population Directorate requesting that his daughter be allowed to immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return by virtue of being the daughter of a Jew (“Ger Gorer” clause). In a unanimous decision, Justices Elyakim Rubinstein, Yitzhak Amit, and Uri Shoham wrote the following (translated into English): [It is not conceivable that anyone who converts to Judaism after immigrating to Israel may bring all their previous descendants with them under the Law of Return. In this case, the petitioner came to Israel as a Christian in 1992, and converted to Judaism in 1997, about five years after his arrival in Israel and about ten years after the birth of his daughter… The interpretation that was proposed by the respondents is consistent with the purposes of Section 4A].
Similarly, in August 2013, the HCJ rejected the petition of a Christian Ethiopian citizen who illegally immigrated to Israel through Egypt and was subsequently arrested. He requested to be allowed to immigrate under the Law of Return for the purpose of reunification with his mother, who had converted to Judaism in Israel (HCJ case 3203/10). The court discussed the question of whether a non-Jew whose mother immigrated to Israel and then converted to Judaism is entitled to legal status in Israel by virtue of Section 4A of the Law of Return. In the court decision, Supreme Court vice-president Miriam Naor and Justices Zvi Zylbertal and Noam Sohlberg stated, inter alia, the following: [The petitioner was born in Ethiopia before the mother of the petitioner—who was Christian—entered Israel. She herself received legal status in Israel by virtue of being married to the grandson of a woman who converted to Judaism, in accordance with the “Ger Gorer” clause, and therefore cannot use the same rule to bring additional relatives to Israel with her. The “Ger Gorer” clause cannot be used over and over again. Consequently, the Court ordered the petitioner to pay legal expenses in the amount of ILS 7,500].
However, this did not bring a final end to the Falash Mura’s ability to immigrate legally. Besides the Entry into Israel Law, it is also possible for anyone who cannot immigrate under the Law of Return to try obtaining a permanent residence permit from the Minister of Interior, if the Minister is convinced that the person who wishes to immigrate must be allowed to do so for humanitarian reasons, for the purpose of family reunification. This is a much more limited and complicated possibility, because it does not automatically grant the right to immigrate but, rather, requires proving that the particular individual who wishes to immigrate must be allowed to do so for justified humanitarian purposes. In addition, it is very difficult to appeal against the decision of the Minister of Interior on the matter, since the law grants the Minister the right to consider each case and decide when justified humanitarian reasons exist.
“Ger Gorer” and Issues of Conversion to Judaism
At the end of Operation Moses (1984) and Operation Solomon (1991), the immigration of most of the Jews of Beta Israel ended, and tens of thousands of Falash Mura remained in Ethiopia, as the State of Israel does not recognize them as eligible for immigration under the Law of Return. The reason—their forced conversion to Christianity, which, Israel claims, banishes them from the right to immigrate, due to the inapplicability of the Law of Return to Jews who have converted to another religion. The few who did manage to immigrate did so by virtue of having relatives who had immigrated and converted, based on the “Ger Gorer” clause.
Shortly before Operation Solomon, at the end of Mengistu Haile Mariam’s brutal Communist rule, some 17,000 Jews from villages in the north of the country came to Addis Ababa because they heard from their families who had already immigrated to Israel that they could do so too if they arrived at the Israeli embassy in the capital.
First, the Jewish Agency consuls received these families and ensured that they were indeed eligible to immigrate. The consuls even gave them money for several months so that they could rent an apartment and buy food until their immigration was approved.
On May 24, 1991, most of the Jews immigrated to Israel, but 3,000 more remained in the embassy building after Israel refused to allow them to immigrate, on the grounds that they were not Jewish. The refused families were furious, and claimed that this was contrary to Jewish law as decided by the late Rabbis Ovadia Yosef and Mordechai Eliyahu, who ruled that “Anusim,” that is, Jews who were forced to convert to another religion or to abandon Jewish practice, should be brought to Israel. In the rabbis’ words: [There are some Ethiopian Jews who were forced to convert to Christianity, and there is a rule in Judaism according to which a Jew who sins is still considered a Jew, especially if the Jew was forced to sin against their own will. Therefore, Ethiopian Jews who were forced to convert must also be helped to immigrate to Israel].
The Chief Rabbinate Council adopted the ruling of the late Rabbi Ovadia Yosef regarding the Jewish status of the Ethiopians from the Beta Israel community who immigrated to Israel, and considered them to be Jewish. However, the currently accepted interpretation in the Rabbinate is that the Falash Mura are not included in this ruling and are considered non-Jewish according to Halacha (Jewish law). Therefore, the Rabbinate demands that the Falash Mura only be allowed to immigrate after a full legal Orthodox conversion. There is also a stricter approach by Litvak rabbis who believe that all Ethiopian Jews are Gentiles, but this approach is only held by a relatively small extreme group, and is not accepted by most.
In contrast, Rabbi Shlomo Moshe Amar, the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, ruled that the Jewish status of the Falash Mura should not be questioned, and that the Law of Return should be applied to them.
Contact Immigration and Aliyah Experts
The issue of obtaining an entry visa based on the Entry into Israel Law is complicated and requires ongoing legal advice and assistance. The law leaves the Minister of Interior much room to decide what to consider as a humanitarian need that justifies issuing a permanent residence permit for the purpose of family reunification. Our law firm has professional lawyers who are knowledgeable in immigration law and have decades of experience. Our lawyers will be happy to meet with you, assist you, and advise you on any question you may have.
:
:מאמרים מומלצים