The trouble in Emmanuel really started in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Shaul where there is a Bais Yaakov elementary school whose principal is Rebbetzin Yocheved Eliashiv, the daughter-in-law of Maran HaRav Eliashiv shlita. As with all Bais Yaakovs, it accepts girls from all ethnic backgrounds as long as they and their homes meet the standards of the school. When Yoav Lalum applied to send his daughter to the school, the principal undertook a routine check to see if he and his daughter fit with the standards of the school. They found this not to be the case, and did not admit the girl.
Rebbetzin Eliashiv certainly did not know how Yoav Lalum would react, but even if she had, she would probably have reacted the same way.
Lalum turned to the secular courts claiming that his daughter was denied admission due to racism.
The court was shown that the student body included both Ashkenazim and Sephardim, and it found that the school was within its rights to determine who is admitted.
From that time on, Yoav Lalum has not stopped trying to fight against every chareidi educational institution that he has had anything to do with, apparently unconcerned with the consequences to others. He is convinced of the justice of his fight, and he is supported by HaRav Yaakov Yosef, who does not follow the path of his own father.
When the controversy in Emmanuel became heated, someone remembered hearing about Lalum's fight, and they called him in to "help" destroy the community in Emmanuel.
Emmanuel — A Changing Community
Two years ago, at the beginning of school year 5768, a special track for girls from chassidic homes was opened in the Bais Yaakov of Emmanuel.
We asked Rav Avrohom Luria, a representative of the parents' committee in Emmanuel, why they opened this separate track.
He answered that they felt that they had no choice. "Many new families came to Emmanuel. Although they see themselves as chareidi, many make various religious compromises. To the parents it is very important that their daughters study with girls from backgrounds similar to theirs. As the makeup of Emmanuel changed, some of the residents, and in particular chassidei Slonim, were forced to set up a different framework from the regular school."
Emmanuel was set up about 25 years ago as a new settlement, striking out from the confines of Jerusalem and Bnei Brak in the Shomron. From the start it included chareidi families from all backgrounds: Ashkenazic, Sephardic, Chassidic and Lithuanian.
The development of Emmanuel did not go smoothly. The original founders went bankrupt (largely from causes unrelated to Emmanuel) and the security situation was tense. These troubles influenced the social makeup of the residents. Originally numbering about 200 families, almost the entire the Lithuanian-yeshiva community left at the same time when Kiryat Sefer opened up. Many chassidic families also left. Ger for example, originally had about 80 families but today there are only 15.
Chassidei Slonim, however, went against this trend. In the last seven or eight years it has grown from about 20 families to the current 60 families.
From the earliest days there were common educational institutions, run by Chinuch Atzmai, that served everyone: a talmud Torah for boys and a Bais Yaakov for girls. Both had impressive buildings in the center of the community.
Some families wanted a more traditional Sephardic school for their boys, and they founded one which continues to operate. The rest learn in the common schools. In some classes, Sephardic children make up half.
Attracted by the cheap housing, many families with weaker backgrounds began to move in. In contrast to a community like Bnei Brak where the overwhelming tone is set by families who are very religious, in Emmanuel the newly religious families would feel less out-of-place. Many were veterans of army service and were less intimidated by the security problems.
"The community," said Rav Luria, "welcomed them with open arms. The principal of the Bais Yaakov, R. Stern, went out of her way to extend all kinds of help to these families."
But it was not all rosy. As they became more numerous, the cultural and religious differences of these newer families became more evident. At that point, some of the more established Emmanuel residents began to feel a need for an educational framework with higher religious standards.
It was at that point that they set up the chassidic track in Emmanuel, with the advice of gedolei Yisroel and the blessing of the director of Chinuch Atzmai at the time, HaRav Meir Luria zt"l. Around a third of the girls who joined the new track were and are from Sephardic backgrounds.
The new track adopted rules similar to those in force at chareidi institutions throughout the country. The girls are not allowed to go to undesirable venues, nor to listen to radio. There is dress code. They must accept the religious authority of the school.
At least 30 percent of the general track of girls who do not accept the higher standards are of Ashkenazic background.
The Wall
"That was a serious mistake," says Rav Luria. "We admit that we should have not built a wall of separation in the school. Nonetheless, it was done sincerely and without any intention of demeaning the other track. The school yard was split into two and two separate entrance gates were built."
But this really touched off the controversy. Many families felt hurt. The media were invited to photograph what was represented as racial discrimination. No one bothered to check out the facts on the ground that the "chassidic" track included a significant number of Sephardic girls and the "Sephardic" track a significant number of Ashkenazic girls.
It was at that point that Yoav Lalum entered the picture and filed a court complaint, while stirring up controversy in the media about the "racial discrimination."
Unfortunately, Lalum has backing. They include Amnon de Hartoch who caused a lot of trouble to the chareidi community when he worked as a legal advisor to the Education Ministry. Lalum also receives funds from the New Israel Fund a left wing organization that helps the Reform movement in its incessant attempts to hamper the chareidi community wherever and whenever it can. Yoav Lalum claimed that the New Israel Fund was supported the Slonimer chassidim, but the truth is that it offered them money which they declined.
A Ministry of Education Investigator
A few months into the 5768 school year, the Ministry of Education sent Dr. Mordechai Bass to investigate the situation in Emmanuel. Dr. Bass is a former managing director of the State Comptroller's office. He is not religious.
Dr. Bass spent a full week in Emmanuel and he really checked things out thoroughly. He interviewed all of the parents in both tracks, spent time in the classrooms observing the lessons and researched the nature of Emmanuel as a whole. After his visit, Dr. Bass issued a report of his findings.
Dr. Bass concluded that the divisions were clearly drawn along religious and not racial lines. He found that there were several relatively minor issues that needed to be addressed but on the whole the divisions were reasonable. He noted that when he heard the way some of the parents in the general track expressed themselves, he could understand why those in the chassidic track wanted to be separate.
In his report, Dr. Bass wrote that any girl who was willing to sign onto the stricter rules was accepted to that group. "My conclusion that this split has no racial aspect is based upon documents I saw, upon what I learned from talking with the parents of both schools and upon what I learned from talking with those who filed the complaints. An especially convincing argument that the Chinuch Atzmai, the principal and the parents who initiated the split made was that any parent who wanted to register their daughter with the new school and was willing to accept the published rules was not turned down. Not only was this point not refuted, but it was confirmed by those who filed the complaints. If there is no turning down, where is there discrimination?"
The High Court
Judge Beinish chose the justices to sit on the case, putting Judge Edmond Levy, who wears a kippah, as the lead justice, with Chanan Meltzer and Edna Arbel. "The behavior of Justice Levy was strange, to speak mildly. One of the petitioners even said that Levy gave him his email and his cell phone number so that he could be sure to stay up to date on all developments," said Rav Luria.
"During the arguments, Edmond Levy spoke as if he was the petitioner. Some of this is reflected in the transcripts (protocols), but some of the transcripts do not reflect what was said during the deliberations. Nonetheless, the parts that are documents are enough to give the clear impression, and please allow us to be shocked, with the interference of the Bagatz (High Court of Justice) in chareidi education. This is an interference that is without precedent, even in the days of Aharon Barak. It is an interference that lacks any legal basis. The judges just decided according to their gut feelings.
"At first they demanded that the Ministry of Education reach some understanding with the petitioners. Edmond Levy demanded the cancellation of a section in the chassidic rules that says that the girls must dress according to the tsnius instructions of the Beis Din of HaRav Wosner. Levy decided that this rule should be canceled `since he is a rov who represents an extremely stringent approach to the laws of tsnius.' That is, Levy knows better and he decides for the parents how their daughters should dress and to which rabbonim they should heed. He also demanded that any symbol of discrimination should be removed.
"One of the rules said that the davening should be using the pronunciation that is accepted in the chareidi-chassidic community. This ticked Levy off. `Even if they gave a hundred lashes,' he said, `I could not daven using the Ashkenazic pronunciation.' [Levy is Iraqi.]
"The parents changed the rules to placate the judge. But he was not satisfied.
"The wall in the school yard was taken down. All the girls wore the same uniform. There was only one entrance. They all had recess together. There was only one faculty room. And so on. But Levy was unstoppable.
"Levy wondered if there is any legal right in the State of Israel to have sectarian education. Chanan Meltzer said this right is anchored in the Basic Law of Human Dignity and Freedom. But Levy said that there was a conflict here between two basic laws, between the basic value of human dignity, and the principle of equality, and since there was discrimination that harmed human dignity, the discrimination should cease. This was based on the ruling of an American judge. Levy decided that the true motive for the different schools is racial and not the religious values that divide the girls.
At this point, however, the story seemed to have ended. A group of Sephardic parents withdrew from the Chinuch Atzmai school and started one affiliated with El Hama'ayan. This was actually the largest group with about 100 girls. The original group had about 80 girls and the chassidic track also had about 80 girls.
Ezra Garshi, the mayor of Emmanuel who had joined the original petitioners, thought that the story was over and even sent an official letter to Lalum, asking him to cease his efforts.
As the 5770 school year approached, the principal sent a letter to all the parents offering them a choice of either the chassidic or the regular tracks, thinking that this was a stable, continuing status.
But the High Court was not satisfied. It demanded that the Ministry of Education close the chassidic track down. The reasoning behind this demand was not clear. But the Court began to insist that the chassidic girls must study together with the others.
The Ministry of Education sent an order to this effect to the Chinuch Atzmai and on 19 Kislev Rabbi Tzvi Baumel, director of Chinuch Atzmai, sent a letter to the principal ordering her to close down the chassidic track immediately.
The parents in the chassidic track were not happy, especially the Sephardic parents in that track. They asked the High Court to be able to join with those answering the suit, wanting to explain clearly that there was nothing racial about the track their daughters studied in. Levy refused to allow them to join, leaving the Ministry of Education, the Chinuch Atzmai and the Emmanuel local council as the only parties answering the suit.
At this point the parents consulted with gedolei Yisroel and they received an unambiguous answer: Do not send your children to the school that the High Court wants. We educate our daughters in the way that we see fit and along the path we have followed since time immemorial.
The result was that they started a completely private school in rented apartments. A special nonprofit organization was set up and money was raised. Chinuch Atzmai and the Ministry of Education could not participate in the funding of the school. Nonetheless, according to the official Court transcripts, Levy said, "If anyone decides to found a new school for these students it is alright. But in this specific school there will be no special tracks."
Things might have ended here, but the petitioners, led by Yoav Lalum, filed a new suit — their third. They claimed that it was contempt of court for the parents not to send their children to the regular school. It was terrible!
"And this," says Rav Luria, "despite the fact that Chinuch Atzmai closed [the separate track] and the parents founded a private school and filed for recognition by the Ministry of Education."
"But teachers from Chinuch Atzmai are working in the new school," argue Lalum.
For a month a special supervisor was sent by the Ministry of Education to verify the teachers teaching in the Chinuch Atzmai school. She found nothing wrong.
Despite all these efforts, on 1 Nisan of this year Levy found that Chinuch Atzmai had not obeyed the Court order. 1. Chinuch Atzmai is doing nothing to bring the girls from the chassidic school back to the regular school. 2. Chinuch Atzmai failed to give an adequate account of the source of the furniture in the chassidic school. [Chinuch Atzmai and the local council say that it belongs to the local council.] 3. Levy does not believe that the teachers of Chinuch Atzmai are not teaching in the new school.
As a result, Levy levied a fine of NIS 5000 a day on Chinuch Atzmai for each day that the girls do not return to the original school. He did not reply to the assertion of Chinuch Atzmai that they have no control over the parents.
Levy also said that he sees the girls as not learning in a school and thereby in violation of the law of compulsory education. He did not explain what this had to do with the petition whose subject was contempt of court.
Rabbi Isaac Goldstein, a representative of Chinuch Atzmai, tried to explain in Court that the girls are learning in an institution that is in the process of registering, and in fact the Ministry of Education will not register a school until it has already started operating.
The Legal Argument
Attorney Rabbi Mordechai Green, founder of Betzedek, represented the parents before the High Court. In his brief, he pleaded that the Court no allow "a clash that is of a religious, value-oriented and conscience driven nature, that does serious harm to the legal rights of the parents as anchored in the Basic Laws of the State of Israel.
"Is there even one citizen of Israel who does not know that the prime rule of the High Court is to protect the basic rights of the individual, his freedom, free choice and legal rights for freedom of religion and conscience?
"Do the parents of Emmanuel not have these rights?
"The basis of all the statutory rights is freedom of choice as the ultimate value. The freedom of every man, created in the image of G-d, to choose to design and to build his life, his character and his home according to his free choice and his own understanding, of course within the parameters of the law.
"Does the High Court think that the chareidi community does not have this right as it chooses to build its world view according to Toras Yisroel exclusively?
"The Court is deviating from its liberal approach in an exceptional way and it is forcing the individual a specific way of behavior that is against his free choice and inner convictions.
"If one were forced to send his child to a specific school and he would turn to the High Court, it is clear that the Court would immediately aid him.
"Is it not the High Court that consistently sees itself as obligated to protect the rights of the individual?" said Attorney Rabbi Green.
