Who is an Israeli
Haaretz is reporting a decision by the Haifa District Court that rejected a petition by Uzzi Ornan who wanted the Interior Ministry “to recognize his citizenship based on the fact that he was born in Israel, rather than on the grounds that he was Jewish.” (hat tip)
The Haifa District Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal submitted by Professor Uzzi Ornan, who sought to compel Israel’s Interior Ministry to recognize his citizenship based on the fact that he was born in Israel, rather than on the grounds that he was Jewish. Ornan, a linguist and member of the Academy of the Hebrew Language, who is also the founder of the League against Religious Coercion in Israel, petitioned the Interior Ministry in 2010 to recognize him as an Israeli, not on grounds of being Jewish but because he was born in Israel. In his ruling on Tuesday, Judge Daniel Fisch said that it was without a doubt that the petitioner, Prof Uzzi Ornan, was born to a Jewish mother, and was therefore Jewish, which the law of return states as the source of his citizenship. “While the legislator’s definition of ‘Jew’ was only added to the Law of Return in 1970,” Fisch wrote, “the turn to the accepted Jewish halakhaic law is not a novelty, and an overview of the ruling preceding the amendment shows that any time that a man’s Judaism needs to be determined, that source has not been overlooked.”
Ornan was part of a larger group of petitioners whose similar case was discussed in the Jerusalem District Court a few years ago. The judge who wrote the decision rejecting their claim was Noam Solberg, who is now a member of the Supreme Court. Judge Solberg’s decision can be found here (Hebrew). Solberg’s decision can be summed up by saying that in his opinion this is not a question that is within the jurisdiction of the courts, rather, it is one that must be decided by society.
מבחינה נורמטיבית, ניתן לבחון את הנושא בכלים משפטיים, אך מבחינה מוסדית הוא איננו שפיט. האופי הדומיננטי של הנושא הוא לבר-משפטי: ציבורי, אידיאולוגי, חברתי, היסטורי ופוליטי. אין לחוות דעתו של בית המשפט בעניינים אלה יתרון על פני דעות של אחרים. ההיבט המשפטי של הנושא הוא טפל לעיקר.
From a normative standpoint, it is possible to examine the issue with legal tools, but from an institutional standpoint it is not justiciable. The dominant nature of the subject is extra-judicial: public, ideological, societal, historical, and political. The court’s opinion in these matters has no advantage over the opinion of others. The legal viewpoint on the subject is secondary to the essence.
See this article about the recent case of Yoram Kaniuk who wanted his identity card to say “no religion.”





