The Israeli High Court ruled that the Interior Ministry
policy requiring foreigners married to Israelis to leave the
country before their residence application can be considered
is unreasonable.
The court further ruled that the ministry's policy of
considering the citizenship application of a resident
foreigner married to an Israeli more than five years after
its submission is untenable, and therefore nullified.
The rulings followed 28 petitions against the ministry's
policy by 31 intermarried couples.
Previously, Interior Ministry policy allowed for a non-Jewish
foreigner married to a Jewish Israeli to receive all the
benefits accorded a Jew under the Law of Return, including
citizenship.
In 1995, the policy was changed, such that a non-Jewish
foreigner married to an Israeli could no longer receive the
Law of Return benefits, and would only have his or her
application for citizenship considered once he or she left
the country.
Furthermore, according to the new policy, citizenship
eligibility would be contingent upon the non-Jew in question
having received permanent resident status, itself only
granted five years after application.
The ministry justified the change in policy on the grounds of
the recent proliferation of fictitious marriages between
Israelis and non-Jewish foreigners in order to secure for the
latter residence in Israel.
In the ruling the court called the new policy unreasonable,
saying there is no evidence it has effected a reduction in
fictitious marriages.
"A foreigner intent on securing extended residence in Israel
via a fictitious marriage will not be deterred by the
prospect of a few months' waiting period abroad, while the
foreigner and Israeli who are genuinely married will
certainly suffer hardships if they are forced either to
separate, or to leave the country together for a number of
months."
The justices further said that verifying the authenticity of
a marriage is far more difficult if one or both spouses are
abroad than if both are in Israel.
The High Court similarly nullified the Interior Ministry
policy of only considering the citizenship application of a
resident foreigner married to an Israeli more than six years
after its submission. The ruling drew on a citizenship law
that requires the government to facilitate the naturalization
of non-Israelis married to Israelis.
The justices did, however, allow that, in cases where the non-
Jewish spouse is residing in Israel illegally, the couple
should be called upon to provide strong evidence of the
authenticity of their marriage.
Deputy Housing Minister Rabbi Meir Porush, of United Torah
Judaism, said that "the Supreme Court has denied the Interior
Ministry its right to expel aliens from the country, who have
married Jewish women in fictitious ceremonies.
"The court has put a time-bomb on our doorstep which includes
societal explosives which are liable to be strewn over large
area," he said.
Rabbi Porush added that the decisive majority in Israel does
not want to absorb hundreds of thousands of foreign workers
in the country who will receive citizenship by means of their
marriages to female citizens of the state.
He stressed the need to limit the authority of the High Court
by means of legislation, and said that a number of
distinguished jurists and retired judges of the High Court
are partners to this demand.
"The UTJ will take steps in the 15th Knesset to enlist a
majority for a proposed law that "not everything is
judicable," he added.
