Haifa court rules divorce refusal is a crime, sentences husband to 18 months in prison
Man is 2nd to be sentenced to prison for refusing to give his wife a ‘get,’ after trapping her in marriage since 2004; rabbinic courts in US, Israel have issued rulings against him
Mati Wagner is The Times of Israel's religions reporter.
The Haifa Magistrates Court ruled Monday that a recalcitrant husband who refused to allow his wife to divorce him for 20 years is guilty of a criminal offense and slapped him with an 18-month jail sentence.
This is only the second time that a secular court has ruled that violating an obligation under halacha (Jewish law) regarding divorce is tantamount to committing a criminal act and is punishable by the State of Israel with incarceration.
“The court ruling is significant because the State of Israel and its citizens are making a clear statement of principle,” Rabbi Dr. Rafi Reches, deputy legal advisor to the State Rabbinical Courts, told The Times of Israel.
“Defying halacha and refusing to give a get [write of divorce] to your wife after being told to by a rabbinical court is a criminal act that deserves to be punished.”
Reches said that Monday’s ruling was another step toward making it possible to extradite men from all over the Jewish Diaspora who refused to give a get to their wives after being ordered to do so by an Orthodox rabbinic court in the Diaspora that is recognized by Israel’s rabbinical courts.
“After we show the world that in Israel, violation of halacha with regard to divorce is a criminal act, we can then pursue recalcitrant husbands abroad. Israel’s rabbinical court can then become an international center for the fight to free agunot,” added Reches.
Agunah is a Hebrew term that literally means “chained” or “anchored” and describes a woman in marital limbo who has cut ties with her husband emotionally and physically, but who has not received a get — Jewish law requires the husband to give his wife the divorce certificate out of his own will — and is not permitted according to Jewish law to remarry because she is still considered married by Jewish law.
Women who adhere to halacha are, therefore, “chained” or “anchored” to a man with whom they no longer want to be married.
In 2018, the Knesset passed legislation that enabled Israel’s rabbinic courts to punish recalcitrant husbands who refuse to give a get to their wives even if neither the husband nor the wife are Israeli citizens.
Reches said that justification for expanding the jurisdiction of Israel’s rabbinical courts to non-Israeli Diaspora Jews is based on existing legislation that enables the State of Israel to prosecute perpetrators of terror against Jews even if neither the victim nor the perpetrator are Israelis.
Monday’s case involved a husband and wife with dual US-Israeli citizenship who married in the US in 1997.
In 2004, the wife filed for a divorce in a rabbinic court in the US, but the husband refused to cooperate, leaving his wife an agunah.
In 2011, during a trip to Israel, the wife filed for divorce with the State Rabbinical Court in Israel.
The rabbinical court ruled that the husband was obligated by halacha to divorce his wife, but the husband refused again.
According to Israeli civil law, the rabbinic court has the power to jail recalcitrant husbands until they agree to give a get.
The rabbinic court proceeded to have the husband arrested and placed in jail in lieu of giving a get.
However, the wife relented, asking the rabbinic court to let the husband go.
But since the wife did not rescind her request for divorce, the rabbinic court pursued a criminal indictment against the husband, based on a State Prosecutor’s directive from 2016.
On Monday, Haifa’s Magistrate court decided in favor of the rabbinic court.
Attorney Susan Weiss, the founder and former director of the Center for Women’s Justice, severely criticized the ruling.
“From start to finish, this decision shows that our divorce regime is bankrupt and doesn’t work,” said Weiss. “The way to solve it is not by criminalizing a civil matter and putting husbands in jail for being stupid. The solution is to separate religion and state.”
Weiss, whose center is dedicated to finding solutions for women whose rights are harmed by the entanglement of religion and state, added that plans by the rabbinical court to extradite non-Israeli Jewish husbands in violation of Jewish divorce law is “a violation of international comity.”
“The State of Israel should not be wasting Israeli taxpayers’ money on filing lawsuits against non-citizens,” she said.
Weiss said she recommended that women not get married in accordance with halacha.
“If the halacha can’t fix itself, the solution is not to violate rules of comity and human rights and to corrupt our civil system. In my mind, this is a terrible decision and nothing but virtue signaling on the part of the rabbinic court,” she said.
In Jewish law, only the husband has the power to finalize divorce by agreeing out of free will to give a get. If he refuses, the wife, who has no power to divorce her husband without his consent, remains an agunah.
In a severely dysfunctional marriage, for instance, when the husband physically or mentally abuses his wife, the halacha empowers the rabbinic court to coerce the husband through a variety of methods, including incarceration, to give his wife a get.
Dr. Rachel Levmore, director of the Agunah Prevention Project of Young Israel and the Jewish Agency for Israel, supported Monday’s ruling.
“Today it has been made clear that this individual’s refusal to fulfill the order of the rabbinical court is not solely a private, personal breach of trust between spouses – it is a violation of a legal provision. The court ruling reflects the fact that the rabbinical court’s power to order a husband to give a get in Israel is of equal standing to an Israeli civil court,” she said.
Levmore added that “this is the second time that a civil court has clarified that disobeying a rabbinical court’s ruling to divorce is a criminal act. By doing so, it has not only made evident the consequences of this man’s actions to him, the civil court has established a societal moral code.”