Download - Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
1/17
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University160 Packard Avenue Medford, MA 02155-7082 USA Tel: +1.617.627.3700
The Fletcher School Online Journal on Southwest Asia and Islamic Civilization Spring 2009
TheIsraeliCitizenshipModel:TheRoleofPluralismandParticularisminDrawingtheBoundariesoftheIsraeliPolityBenedettaBerti
INTRODUCTION
This article examines the Israeli citizenship
discourse, emphasizing the influence of Israels
historical experience, societal composition and
constitutivevalues.The firstsectionprovides the
theoreticalfoundationoftheessay,describingthe
Israeli citizenship model, stressing its complex
nature, and explaining how three alternative
models of citizenshipliberal, republican, and
ethnonationalistcoexist and interact in the
Israelipolity.
The existence of multiple, and at times
divergent, notions of citizenship reflects theinternal tensionsbetween competing corevalues
of thestate,suchaspluralismanddemocracyon
the one hand and ethnonationalism and
particularism on the other. The second section
analyzes the current normative framework
concerning Israeli nationality law, highlighting
the dynamics described in the introductory
section. Finally, the article applies these
theoretical and normative frameworks to a
specific case study in which the notions of
citizenship
described
above
clash.
This
particular
case study looks at the current family
reunification policy visvis spouses of citizens
coming from the West Bank and Gazaemphasizing how positive political steps are
neededtoaccommodatethedisparatevaluesand
imperativesinIsraelicitizenshipdiscourse.
WHICH CITIZENSHIP MODEL FOR ISRAEL?
Thecitizenshipdiscourseinanygivensociety
is influencedby apluralityof factors, suchas:a
countrys history, itsjuridical traditions, nation
building objectives, and societal composition.1
Furthermore,thecitizenshipmodelanddiscourse
adopted in a particular country are alsointrinsically related to internal conceptions of
collective identification. Theyembodya specific
culturalselfrepresentation,asenseofnationhood
andcommunity,andaparticularisticethnos.2
AsGershonShafir3pointsout,becauseofthis
inherent complexity and given the multiple
factors that shape a countrys citizenship
discourse, the final narrative is hardly ever
monolithic.Itoftenconsistsofalternativenotions
that coexist andat timesclash. This is
particularly
true
in
the
Israeli
case,
where
the
tensions among alternative citizenship
conceptionsaremodeledaftertheinternalclashes
between conflicting constitutive values, such as
ethnicidentityandparticularismversuspluralism
and democracy. As Shafir further explains, the
tension between the exclusionary impetus of
frontier society and the inclusionary impetus of
civil society (...) has expressed itself in a
Benedetta Berti, FletcherMALD 2007, is theEarhart Doctoral Fellow at the Fletcher School
and the Neubauer Fellow at the Institute for
NationalSecurityStudies (TelAvivUniversity).
She specializes in international security studies
andMiddleEaststudies.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
2/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
2
hierarchical and fragmented citizenship
structure.4 Inotherwords,different corevalues
connected with Israels historical experience
shape the states view of citizenshipenabling
three models to coexist: liberal, republican, and
ethnonationalist.
The republican ideal of citizenship, focused
onthenotionofpublicgoodandcommonwill,onactiveanddirectparticipationinthepublicsphere
as thekeydutyofcitizens,on thepraiseofcivic
virtues, and on citizen mobilization,5 was the
predominantmodel in theYishuv6periodand in
theearlyyearsoftheStateofIsrael.Accordingly,
the republican idea of citizenship served two
mainfunctions.First,duringIsraelsemergenceas
a frontier society, when a zone of
contact/conflict arose between different societal
groups,7 the concept of citizenship was used to
draw
community
boundaries
and
create
an
internal and cohesive community visvis the
others. Secondly, the republican ethnos was
usedinternally, inthenationbuildingprocess,to
mobilize citizens around the ideal of common
goodand themoralpurposeofZionism. Italso
served to promote direct participation in the
polity trough the national myth of the early
Chalutzim (pioneers)a narrative that
emphasized values such as collective solidarity,
patriotism, and labor as a means of
individual/collective
emancipation.
Evenifithaslostprominence,dueinpartto
the evolution of Israel from a frontier, state
dominatedsocietyinitsformativeliminalyearsto
a more established, civilsociety oriented
democracy,therepublicanidealofcitizenshipand
itsrhetoricisstillpresent incontemporaryIsraeli
society.8Themajorcontributionoftherepublican
citizenship model in contemporary Israel is the
continuation of the ideal of citizenship as active
participationandnotjustabundleofrights.This
is best embodied, for instance, in the ethnos
surroundingthemilitaryservice:
[T]heemphasisonmilitaryserviceforthe
nation as the proof of inclusion in the
body politic echoes a republican
conception of citizenship, in which a
connection is made between the
commitment to make sacrifices for the
nation and the right to fair share in
governing()9
However, the republican ethnos of the early
period has been challenged by the growing
impact of the liberal idea of citizenship. This
second model of citizenship hasbeen associated
with the ongoing debate on the nature andcharacter of the country as a Jewish and
DemocraticState.10
Since its formativeyearsof theYishuv, Israel
conceived of and described itself asboth a state
fortheJewishpeopleandasademocracy. Thisis
clearlyemphasizedbothintherhetoricofIsraels
earlyleadersanditsconstitutivedocuments,such
as the Declaration of Independence,11 which
establishedsidebysidea state for theJewish
people and the principle of nondiscrimination
applicableto
all
citizens
irrespective of
religion,race,or
sex.12
Thereforeat
least at a
theoretical
levelthere is
little doubt that
Israels state
building
process
was indeed
aimedatcreating
a Jewish,
democratic state and that the liberal notion of
citizenshipflourishedinthiscontext.
Theliberalidealstressesuniversalcitizenship,
grounded on the principles of generality, civic
unity and cohesion, and equal treatment of all
citizensunderthelaw.13 Inthiscontext,thebasic
conception of liberal citizenship as abundle of
rights, focusedon individualsandon theprivate
sphere, has been gaining increasing support in
Israeli societysuperimposing itself on the
republican model. This has created internal
tension between the universal character of
citizenship rights under the liberal model
adopted in most liberal democraciesand the
exclusivity and particularism of the republican
Thereforeat least at atheoretical levelthere
is little doubt thatIsraels state-buildingprocess was indeedaimed at creating aJewish, democraticstate and that theliberal notion of
citizenship flourishedin this context.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
3/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
3
model,rootedintheearlyformativeperiodofthe
state.
Finally, in addition to these two citizenship
models, the Israeli polity also encompasses an
ethnonationalistdiscourseandcitizenshipmodel.
In fact, Israel isoftenmentionedasanexception
to the contemporary tendency of modern
democracies to distance themselves frommaintaining a strong ethnonationalist affiliation
in the
elaboration of
their
citizenship
discourse.
Israel stands
out in its
continued
insistence on
a
firm
and
explicit bond
between
ethnicallybased nationality and statehood. In
declaring that Israel is the state of the Jewish
people,what is in effectbeing claimed isoneof
the basic tenets held by classical theorists of
nationalism: that a state ought to represent a
nation.14
Numerousscholars,therefore,haveidentified
Israel as an ethnic democracy, where the
dominant
ethnic
group
enjoys
special
collective
rights,whilethenonJewishcitizensarelimitedto
individualrights.15Similarly,thecountryhasbeen
identified as an ethnocracy, where a specific
group attempts to assert and maintain
disproportionatepower, rights,and control,16 for
the sakeof cultural and religioushomogeneity.17
At the extreme of this spectrum, scholars have
indicatedthatthisstrongaffiliationwithanethnic
groupconstitutesa structural impediment to the
fulfillment of the premises of liberal democracy,
callingthestateanimagineddemocracy.18
Thecitizenshipdiscourseassociatedwiththis
characteristic of Israeli democracy is ethno
nationalist, where a common religiousethnic
historicalculturebecomes thedefining featureof
membership in the political community.19 An
exampleofhow thisethnonationalistconception
of the polity has shaped Israeli political and
societal life is manifest in certain aspects of its
immigrationpolicy. Infact,thecoreprovisionof
the Israeli immigration law, the Law of Return,
reflectsaperceptionofmembership in the state
which is not territoriallybound or defined,but
ratherisbasedonapreexistingaffiliationwiththe
Jewishpeople,initsperceptionofthatpeopleasa
nation.20 This premise leads to an unorthodox
approach to immigration. The traditionalhierarchical order that privileges native citizens
overimmigrantsisnullifiedandanewimmigrant
is entitled to the very same status as a native
citizen, in thenameof culturalunityand shared
nationhood.As a result, Israelbecamea country
ofimmigrants21withanationalitylawfocusedon
emigrationandonpreservingstrongtieswiththe
largerethniccommunityofreference.22
Together with an ethnonationalist model of
citizenship, Israel has also adopted a broader
concept
of
groupdifferentiated
citizenship,
definedbyKymlicka as the adoptionofgroup
specific polyethnic, representation, or self
governing rights.23 The idea of differentiated
group rights and duties is in fact another
important aspect of the Israeli conception of
citizenship. In Israel, the concept of citizenship,
whichisassociatedwithguaranteesofbasicrights
andfreedominaccordancewithliberalprinciples,
is also qualifiedby the concept of nationality as
ethnic identification (Jewish, Arab, Bedouin,
Druze;
or
Jewish,
Christian,
Muslim).24
In
other
words,allcitizensenjoyadegreeofequalrights,
but these generic protections are also associated
withspecificrightsanddutiesthatarederivedby
the combination of their citizenship and ethnic
nationality. This creates myriad different
conceptions and narratives of citizenship and
membership status, as well as a groupbased
conceptionofrightsandduties.
For instance, the membership in an ethnic
religiouscommunitydefinestherulesofpersonal
status and family law that are applicable to that
citizen.25Thisisbecausethereligiouscourtsofthe
three main religious communities (Jewish,
Muslim, Christian) are empowered by the
Ministry of Religion to deal with family and
personal status matters26 and have personal
jurisdiction over all members of their
communitya legacy of the Ottoman millet
system. An additional example of group
Similarly, the countryhas been identified as an
ethnocracy, where aspecific group attemptsto assert and maintain
disproportionate power,rights, and control, for
the sake of cultural andreligious homogeneity.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
4/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
4
differentiatedduties is the obligation to serve in
the army, which although mandatory for all
Israelicitizens,isaccordingtoanadministrative
practice normally not enforced on Palestinian
Arab Israelis (while Druze and Bedouin men
regularlyserveinthearmy)27.
In sum, defining a single citizenship model
for the State of Israel is extremely complex, asradically different notions of this concept are all
accommodated in the citizenship discourse.
Therefore republican, liberal,ethnonational,and
even multicultural/groupbased models of
membership andbelonging coexist in the Israeli
national political discourse. This coexistence
reflects the internal struggle between the
universalistandpluralistnatureoftheIsraelistate
and its particularistic and exclusive tendencies.
As the article will further articulate, this
multiplicityof
models
both
echoes
and
explains
the internal tension between Jewish and
Democratic.
NATIONALITY LAW IN ISRAEL: AN OVERVIEW
Israels citizenship policy is based on two
main legislative acts: the Law of Return5710
(1950),28andtheNationalityLaw5712(1952).29
The Law of ReturnTheLawofReturnisacorelegislativeactthat
enshrines the right of all Jews to immigrate to
Israel. It represents a constitutive principle
recognized since the establishment of the State
and embodied in the 1948 Declaration of
Independence: The State of Israel willbe open
forJewishimmigrationandfortheIngatheringof
the Exiles.30 Accordingly, the Law of Return
reflectsanunderstandingoftheStateofIsraelasa
trusteeinchargeofadministeringarightthatin
fact predates the birth of the state itself.31 As
eloquently putby former Israeli Prime Minister
DavidBenGurion inhis introductionoftheLaw
ofReturn:
ThislawdoesnotprovidefortheState
tobestowtherighttosettleinIsraelupon
theJewlivingabroad;itaffirmsthatthis
rightisinherentinhimfromtheveryfact
ofbeingaJewThisrightprecededthe
State;thisrightbuilttheState32
The conceptofapreexisting rightofallJews to
immigrate to Israel is also entrenched in the
semanticsoftheJewishimmigrationdiscourse.In
fact,theactofimmigratingtoIsraelisnotdefined
as immigration. The term used is aliyah or
ascent;which,inconnectionwiththeideaofself
fulfillment,confersontotheactofimmigrationanadditional
layer of
symbolic
validation.
This specific
understanding
of the State as
a trustee,
together with
the powerful
evocative
value of the
concept of
aliyah, lay at
the core of the
Law of Return, which codified ethnic ius
sanguinis33asthepreferredmechanismtoacquire
citizenship.
Adopted in1950, theLawofReturnhasan
important place among Israels legislative acts.
The State of Israel lacks a formal written
Constitution,
and
in
its
place,
it
has
a
series
of
Basic Laws,34 which provide a constitutional
basisforthestate.AlthoughtheLawofReturnper
se is not abasic law, it is commonly deemed to
possess constitutional implications,35 both
becausethelegislativebranchhasshownextreme
reluctance in considering amendments to this
Law, and also because it reflects the founding
ideologyofIsrael. Thus, it islikelytobegivena
prominentroleinthefutureconstitution.36
Themainprovisionofthe1950LawofReturn
states: EveryJew has the right to come to this
country as an oleh,37 and the only legitimate
reason to deny this right is if the applicant is
engagedinanactivitydirectedagainsttheJewish
people; or is likely to endanger public health or
the security of the State. According to the
provisions of the Law of Return, all olim
immigrating to Israel will be granted an equal
statustothosewhowereborninthecountry.
In fact, the act ofimmigrating to Israel is
not defined as immigration . The termused is aliyahor ascent;
which, in connectionwith the idea of self-
fulfillment, confers onto
the act of immigrationan additional layer ofsymbolic validation.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
5/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
5
This legislative act creates obvious problems
under a liberal citizenship model and the Israeli
legislative branch did not ignore this contrast.
Haim Cohn, who was attorney general in 1950,
explained to the Constitution, Law and Justice
Committee in the Knesset: we do not wish to
introducediscriminationbetweenJewsandnon
Jews inanyotherlaw.This istheonlylawtolaydownspecialrightsforaJewbecauseheisaJew
().38 Since the very outset, there were clear
internal
tensions
between the
Law of
Return and
its ethno
national
implications,
and
the
equal rights
principle
that had
shaped the
Israeli
democracy since the Declaration of
Independence.39 This tension, although not fully
resolved, was lessened however by the more
comprehensive Nationality Law, passed in 1952,
providing alternative means to acquire Israeli
citizenship
outside
the
venues
provided
by
the
LawofReturn.
Additionally,theLawofReturnwasnotonly
problematic visvis the regulation and
recognitionofnonJewish immigrationbut italso
left a wide degree of uncertainty around a
number of problematic issues, such as: who is a
Jew according to the Law of Return? And what
would be the status of nonJewish spouses of
eligibleJews under the same law? The issue of
establishingwho is aJew for thepurposeof the
LawofReturnreachedtheIsraeliSupremeCourt
in the ShalitCase
(Benjamin Shalit v. Population
Registry).40 In1967BenjaminShalit,married toa
nonJewishwoman,attemptedtoregisterhistwo
children (Israelicitizensbyvirtueofhavingborn
in Israel and having a Jewish father) in the
Population Registry asJewish nationals with no
religion (nationality and religion being two
different categories in the population registrys
records). The registry refused to recognize the
children asJewish nationals on the ground that
the childrens mother was not Jewish.41 The
petitioner disputed this notion of Jewish
nationalityconnectedtoareligiousinterpretation
of Judaism, he argued in favor of a secular
definition of membership based on self
identification, and he grounded the complaintunder his right to freedom of conscience as
guaranteed by Israels Declaration of
Independence.
InahistoricverdictfortheStateofIsrael,the
court ruled thatfor the purpose of the
population registry and the Law of Returnthe
government did not have the authority to
determine a persons national affiliation.
Additionally, the court ruled that a bona fide
statement of affiliation shouldbe considered as
proofof
nationality.
The
case
created
enormous
distress within Israeli society, emphasizing the
conflictsbetweensecularandreligiouscitizens.It
led the Knesset to amend the Law of Return,
which tried tobalance the secular and religious
viewsonnationality.
As a response to the religious communitys
plea to set the communityboundaries according
to religious Jewish law, the 1970 amendment
provided more firm criteria, besides self
identification,toestablishwhoqualifiedasJewish
under
the
Law
of
Return.
But
it
also
included
new
categoriesofpeopleeligibletobegrantedtheoleh
status, in linewithamoresecularunderstanding
of citizenship law.42 The amendment, in fact,
extendstheLawofReturnto:
()achildandagrandchildofaJew,
thespouseofaJew,thespouseofachild
ofaJewandthespouseofagrandchild
ofaJew,exceptforapersonwhohas
beenaJewandhasvoluntarilychanged
hisreligion.43
Furthermore, the law specifies that For the
purposesof thisLaw, Jewmeansapersonwho
was born of a Jewish mother or has become
convertedtoJudaismandwhoisnotamemberof
anotherreligion.44
However,evenifthisamendmentputanend
to many controversies arising previously under
In a historic verdict forthe State of Israel, the
court ruled thatfor thepurpose of the
population registry andthe Law of Returnthe
government did not havethe authorit y to
determine a personsnational affiliation.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
6/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
6
the Law of Return, it still left room for debate
regardingwhatconstitutesavalidconversionfor
thepurposeoftheLawofReturn.Thisquestion,a
corollary of the wider dilemma of defining who
qualifies asaJew,was also theobjectofjudicial
review in the Shas Movement v. Director of
PopulationRegistry (1989), and Pesarro (Goldstein)
v.Minister
of
Interior
(1995)decisions.45Inthe1989
case,thecourtdeterminedthatforthepurposeof
the Law of Return, and also for immigration
purposes, any certified conversion performed
outside of Israel wouldbe considered valid and
wouldautomaticallyentitlethatindividualtooleh
rights.
Inthe1995case,thecourtdidnotruleonthe
merits and declined to order the population
registry to register as aJew a woman who had
gonethroughanonorthodoxconversionwhilein
Israel.But
it
did
indicate
that
the
Law
of
Return
seemed to allow her to do so. This spurred a
controversy ledbytheOrthodoxChiefRabbinate
in Israel, which eventually ended with the
recognition of the Rabbinates monopoly on
conversions in the country.46 More recently, in
March2005,thecourtaddressedagaintheissueof
nonorthodoxconversionsinIsrael,andruledthat
individuals residing in the country and who
undergo thenonorthodox conversionprocess in
Israel, but who are able to perform the actual
conversion
ceremony
abroad,
will
be
recognized
asJewsforimmigrationpurposes.47
The Nationality Law
Adopted in 1952, the Nationality Law
regulates acquisition and loss of Israeli
nationality. Israeli nationality is conferred
through theLawofReturn,analyzedabove,and
through birth, residence, and naturalization.
These rules apply equally to Jewish and non
Jewish immigrants.48 Nationality by birth is
grantedaccordingtotheiussanguinisprinciplein
three instances:first,toallchildrenborn inIsraelto at least an Israeli parent; second, to children
bornoutsideofIsraelprovidedthatat leastone
parentisacitizenbybirth,naturalization,return,
or residence and third, to peopleborn in Israel
withoutanynationality.
Nationality in the third instance,however, is
grantedonlyiftheapplicationissubmittedwhen
the candidate isbetween18and25yearsofage,
andifhe/shehasresidedinthecountryfiveyears
prior to submitting the application.49 This
provisionistheresultofa1980amendmenttothe
1952 law. It solves one of the anomalies of the
preceding regime, underwhich childrenborn in
Israel by one Israeli parent were granted
citizenshipthroughthelawofreturn,ratherthanaccording amore general ius sanguinis principle.
The 1980 amendment achieved the important
outcomeofstandardizingthecitizenshipbybirth
acquisitionprocess, eliminating religiouslybased
differences.50
Regarding
citizenship by
residence, in
1952 the
nationality by
residence
provision was
used to
determine and
regularize the
statusofArabIsraelis.Inparticular,thelawgave
Israeli citizenship to all Palestinians who were
registered in the population registry, who had
been residing in Israelsince theestablishmentof
the state, and who were still an inhabitant of
Israelatthetimethelawwaspassedaswellasto
all
children
born
in
Israel
after
the
establishment
of the stateby parents who complied with the
abovementionedrequirements.51Theformulation
of citizenshipby residence, in these terms, was
highly problematic. It left a number of Arab
inhabitants of Israel defacto stateless, since they
could not meet the requirements for citizenship,
and their Palestinian citizenship had been
terminatedwiththeendof theBritishMandate.52
The 1980 amendment to the Nationality Law
solved this situation firstbygrantingnationality
via residence to this category of people and
extending it to their children and second by
standardizing the acquisition of nationality
throughtheiussanguinisprinciple.53
With respect tonationalitybynaturalization,
thisformofcitizenshipisgrantedatthediscretion
oftheMinistryoftheInterioruponthefulfillment
of certain requirements. The requirements
include: three out of five years of continuous
The 1980 amendmentachieved the important
outcome ofstandardizing the
citizenship-by-birth
acquisition process,eliminating religious-
based differences.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
7/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
7
residency prior to submitting the naturalization
application;permanentresidencystatus;intention
to settle in Israel; and renunciation of previous
nationalities (asopposed to thosewhonaturalize
under the Law of Return, and who are not
required todenouncepreviousaffiliations).54The
Minister,athisdiscretion,canexemptcandidates
from complying with some of these criteria;55andas a matter of policy56this was generally
donetonaturalizespousesofIsraelicitizenswho
could not use the Law of Return provision to
acquire Israeli
citizenship (i.e.
spouses of non
Jewish citizens)
and who did
notmeetall the
requirements to
obtain
citizenship by
naturalization.
However, since
1996, the
Minister of
Interior has
adopted an
equalizer provision. This makes it harder, in
practice, to obtain citizenship for all spouses. It
requires them to leave the country for sixweeks
after
the
marriage,
re
enter
on
a
temporary
visa,
and only then apply for permanent residency
within Israel, thereby substantially delaying the
initiationofthenaturalizationprocess.57
The second part of the Nationality Law
discusses the conditions under which a citizen
could lose Israeli nationality. In general,
nationality is lost through a double procedure
requiring both the formal renunciation of the
individual and the acceptance of such
renunciationby the Ministry of the Interior. In
thissense,therightofexpatriationisnotabsolute.
Rather, it isahybridbetween the formulationof
expatriation as an unconditional right of each
individual and the older British doctrine of
perpetualallegiance,whichquestionedthenotion
of voluntary expatriation/relinquishment of
citizenshipandstatedthattheallegiancebetween
the citizen and state could not be severed
unilaterally by the individual.58 Naturalized
citizens, however, can lose their citizenship for
numerous reasons, ranging from acts of
disloyalty, to having acquired it through false
claims. Finally, all citizens could have their
citizenship revoked for committing certaingrave
actsofdisloyaltyagainstthestate.59
MINORITY RIGHTS AND THE NATIONALITYLAW: A CASE STUDY
This section discusses the nexus and
interrelation between nationality law and
minorityrightsthroughthelensoftheNationality
andEntryintoIsraelLaw,asthisseemstobeone
of the main areas where the tensions between
particularism and universalism, as well as the
conflicts between different understandings of
citizenship,manifestthemselves.Accommodation
of minority rights within Israel is also an
important criterion by which to evaluate theJewishanddemocraticnatureof thestateand to
analyze the de facto enforcement of the de jure
equalityprovisionintheIsraelipolity.
Israel does grant equal civil and political
rights toall itscitizens,at leastata formal level.
However, thekey challenge seems tobehow to
ensure that the dejure equality provision in the
IsraeliBasicLawstranslatesintodefactoequality.
Given the stratified nature of Israeli society,
which seems to guarantee differential access to
different
ethnic
groups
within
the
Israeli
polity
and affirm ethnonational conceptions of
citizenship,thisquestionisallthemorecomplex.
The problem is compounded by the de facto
exclusion of Arab minorities from both power
sharing arrangements and distribution of
resources and wealth. In this sense,JewishArab
relationsaretheacidtestinIsraelidemocracy.
Since the creationof theStateof Israel itself,
citizenship status of the Arab minority in Israel
hasbeenaprominentissue.Attheendofthe1948
War, the new government immediately granted
citizenship to the Arab inhabitants who found
themselves inIsraelafterthewar (about160,000)
and later established a mechanism to regularize
otherresidentsthroughthe1952NationalityLaw
provision, as explained in theprevious section.60
Pelednotesthattheoptionofdenyingcitizenship
status on thebasis of a strict ethnonationalistic
principle (whichwouldhavemade Israel similar
Following the decisionto grant citizenship
status to Arabresidents , the State
was immediately
confronted with thechallenge of extendingthe same rights to the
Arab minor ity thatwere available to all
other c itizens.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
8/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
8
toSouthAfricasHerrenvolk)wasneverperceived
asalegitimateoptionandcontradictorytoIsraels
early commitment to democracy and equality.61
Ontheotherhand,astrictlyliberalunderstanding
of citizenship, which would have prevented the
development of a preferential immigration right
fortheJewishpeople,wasalsotobeperceivedat
oddswithbothZionistideologyandthehistoricalexperience that led to the establishment of the
StateofIsrael.Therefore, theadoptedmodelwas
acompromisebetweenthesetwo
views, an attempt to reconcile
universalismandparticularism.
Following the decision to
grant citizenship status to Arab
residents, the State was
immediatelyconfrontedwiththe
challengeofextending the same
rightsto
the
Arab
minority
that
were available to all other
citizens. In this sense, Ben
Gurion first stressed theneed toextendpolitical
rights to the new citizens in the first 1949
elections, declaring: We must not begin with
nationaldiscrimination.62
However, until 1966, a major obstacle
persisted for Arab citizens seeking to exercise
their rights and freedoms as well as achieve de
facto equality. Following the 1945 Defense
Emergency
Regulations63
a
measure
imposed
by
the security situation in the country and
incompatible with a liberal understanding of
citizenshipArab citizens were subject to a
separate military administration. In 1966, in a
major equalizing step, the military government
wasdismantledandbothJewishandnonJewish
citizens became subject to the same
administrativecivilian law. The following year,
withthe1967warandthesubsequentinclusionof
East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights under
Israelicivilian law,Arab residentsof thoseareas
became eligible to apply for Israeli citizenship
throughnaturalization. Inpractice thiswasoften
difficult to do, as it was perceivedby the same
Arab community as an act of treason and a
repudiationofthePalestiniancause.64
At the same time,Arab Israelisbegan in the
late 1960s to bring the first constitutional
challengestotheethnonationalunderstandingof
citizenship that hadbecome so predominant in
the country. In1965, thepetitioners inYeredorv.
Chairman of the Central Elections Committee65,
members of the Arab socialist group alArd,
protested against the Central Election
Committees refusal to register them as
candidates in the parliamentary elections. The
Committee did so on the grounds that theMinistryofDefensehaddeclaredalArdanillegal
group due to its nonacceptance of Israels
territorial integrity and its
right to exist as a state.66 On
that occasion, the court held
that the Committee had the
authority todisqualifyparties
advocating for thedissolution
of the state and that the
disqualificationofthe listwas
validfor
the
reason
that
this
candidates list is an illegal
associationsinceitspromoters
negatetheintegrityandveryexistenceoftheState
of Israel.67Thisprinciplewasupheld in1985 in
Moshe Neiman et al. v. Chairman of the Central
ElectionsCommittee,althoughinthatcasethecourt
did not uphold the disqualification of aJewish
(Kach) and an Arab political group (Progressive
ListforPeace),arguingthatsuchdisqualifications
are only valid when the existence of the list
threatens
the
survival
of
the
state
or
its
democraticcharacter.68
Currently, the laws on political participation
areregulated in theBasicLaw,by theregulation
of the Knesset passed in 1950. Specifically, the
1985 7A Amendment to the law69 forbids
participation to those opposing the Jewish
character of state, its democratic nature, or to
thosewhoopenlyinciteracism.Thisappearstobe
a compromise to uphold both the liberal
democratic model of the state and its ethno
nationalist character. But the law has been
criticized by Arab Israelis for reducing their
political rights, including their right to challenge
theJewish character of the state. This debate is
particularlyrelevantinthecontextoftheongoing
debateon the future IsraeliConstitution.Several
Arab Israeli groups have proposed alternative
notionsoftheJewishandDemocraticmodel,de
Several Arab Israeli groupshave proposed alternativenotions of the Jewish and
Democratic model, defactoarticulating an
alternative
conceptualization of t henotion of cit izenship.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
9/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
9
facto articulating an alternative conceptualization
ofthenotionofcitizenship.
For instance, the main center for the
protectionof therightsofArabcitizens in Israel,
theAdalahCentertheLegalCenterforRightsof
the Arab minority in Israelhas put forward a
draft democratic constitution asking to redefine
Israel as a democratic bilingual and multicultural State, and to renounce theJewish and
Democratic paradigm.70 Similarly, the National
Committee for the Heads of the Arab Local
Authorities in Israelhasargued for theabolition
of policies that grant privileges to the majority
ethnic group and to recognize the Palestinian
citizens as an indigenous minority with self
government rights.71 Other sectors of the Arab
IsraelipopulationhavenotchallengedtheJewish
Democraticexistingmodelperse.Forinstance,an
April2007
poll
by
the
Israel
Democracy
Institute
revealed that 75 percent of the Arab minority
would not oppose the Jewish and democratic
model in theupcomingconstitution,as longas it
came together with an equal rights provision to
protectminorities.72
Thisperspective isparticularly significant. It
recognizes that the proliferation of multiple
notions of citizen and theJewish character of
the state are not per se obstacles towards
achievingdefactoequality.Yet itdemonstratesa
desire
that
the
State
provide
a
political
answer
to
theproblembytakingpositivestepstoreducethe
equalitygapthatexistsamongitscitizens.
In describing the citizenship status of
minoritygroupswithinIsrael,withallthedefacto
limitationsand thedejureproceduraldifferences
discussedabove, it isalsoworthmentioning that
Arab citizens of Israel have a set of rights and
duties derived from their minority status. They
are enshrined in accommodation (polyethnic)
and selfgovernment rights.73 Within the
accommodation system for minority groups,
rights include but are not limited to: linguistic
rights,therighttopreservetheminoritylanguage
andculturethroughthemaintenanceofaseparate
educational system, and the rights to religious
freedomand tomaintainaseparatecourtsystem
for personal status matters.74 Selfgovernment
rightswith the exception of the exercise of
jurisdictionby religious courtsare not as well
developed in the collective form and minorities
have often criticized this as an obstacle to the
achievementof a truly liberal and multicultural
system.
However, this particular problem is not
exclusive to the Israeli polity. Devising a
framework under which minority and group
rights arereconciled with
the need to
promote and
preserve
political unity
and societal
cohesion
represents an
immensely
complicated
challenge
for
any multi
ethnic state. In
this sense, the assumption that only an identity
neutral state can provide effective minority and
selfgovernmentrightsandensureadequate legal
protection for its minorities is not thoroughly
proven.
On the contrary, effective minority rights
protectionoften stems from rejecting colorblind
approaches and by acknowledging, promoting,
and
protecting
the
different
cultural,
ethnic,
and
religious identities within a given society.
Applying this framework to the State of Israel
would suggest that, instead of weakening the
Jewish nature of the State, it would be more
effective to strengthen the special rights and
statusof existingminoritygroups (whichwould
notalterthepredominantlyJewishidentityofthe
overwhelmingmajorityof its citizens)aswellas
improve thedefactoequalityofallof itscitizens.
Similarly,intheIsraelicase,itcouldverywellbe
that other factorssuch as the existence of an
armed conflict and the persistence of substantial
security threats to the Statehave impaired the
concrete achievementofautonomy andminority
rights far more than the Jewish identity of the
state. That said, there are cases in which the
democraticimperativesofthestateandtheliberal
understandingofcitizenshipcomeunder intense
distress.One such example is the current family
In this sense, theassumption that onlyan identity neutral
state can provideeffective minori ty andself-government rightsand ensure adequatelegal protection for it s
minorities is notthoroughly proven.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
10/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
10
reunification policy of Arab Israelis. This policy
touches on that same intersection between
minorityrightsandcitizenshipdiscourse, further
testing the Israeli systems ability to uphold its
liberalpremises.
Between 1967 and 2002, the
common practice regarding
family reunifications of ArabIsraelis with spouses residing in
the areas of Gaza and the West
Bank was to allow the Israeli
spouse to file (and inmost cases
obtain)apermittobringthenon
Israeli spouse to live in Israel.75
However, following the March
31, 2002 suicide attack in Haifa
carried out by Hamas member
Shadi Tubasimwho had
succeeded
in
entering
Israel
through the family reunification
program for Arab Israelis and
residentsthe Interior Ministry temporarily
stoppedallpendingreunificationrequests.76
The temporary freeze was then followedby
the approval of the Nationality and Entry into
Israel (Temporary Order) Law, (5763 2003),77
whichprohibited inhabitantsof theseareas from
obtainingaresidencepermittostayinIsrael,thus
preventing family reunification between Israeli
citizens
and
their
spouses.
Although
the
law
was
dictated by legitimate security concerns and
written in colorblind terms, thepracticaleffect
ofthisprovisionwasto impingeuponthefamily
rights of one particular group of citizens and
contradict the classic liberal understanding of
citizenship rights. The law did, however, allow
exceptions. For instance, it allowed exceptional
temporary residency permits for work or health
reasons or to prevent the separation of a child
under the age of twelve from his/her parents
(providedthattheparentswerelegallyinIsrael).
This legislative initiative was designed as a
temporary measure to be valid for a oneyear
period. The government could renew these
measures for security purposes provided it had
reviewed the lawand itseffects.TheNationality
and Entry into Israel Law was renewed inJuly
200478 and again inJuly 2005 when the Knesset
reconfirmed the extension of the law for an
additional period. The Knesset did, however,
makeaseriesofamendments. Itallowedspecial
permits for spouses of Israeli citizens (female
spouses over 25 years of age and male spouses
over35yearsofage),79and for
childrenunder14yearsofage,80
andreiterated thepossibilityof
obtaining special temporarypermits for work and health
reasons. Currently, the law
amendedtoextendthefreezeto
citizens of enemy stateshas
been reapproved and extended
untilJuly2009.81
The Nationality and Entry
into IsraelLawhasbeenat the
center of an intense debate
within Israeli society. It has
been
perceived
as
a
discriminatory law that
disproportionately affects Arab
Israelisbylimitingtheircitizenshiprightsaswell
as their basic civil liberties. This has been the
argument of the Adalah Center. The Center has
challengedtheconstitutionalityof theLaw,filing
a complaint in August 2003 in which it argued
that: the law violatedbasic international human
rights standards as well as the constitutionally
protected right to family and equality; it was
discriminatory
in
its
nature;
and
it
was
a
disproportionatemeasureadoptedinthenameof
security.82
The Supreme Court delivered its opinion in
May2006anddismissedthepetition(byavoteof
65).Itdidsoonthegroundsthatthelawdoesnot
violate a constitutional right (since citizens have
no constitutional right for their spouses to
immigrate to Israel), especially considering the
stateofwarbetween theareaand Israeland the
security needs of the state (VicePresident
Cheshin andJustices Grunis and Naor).83Justice
Adiel andJustice Rivlin concurred in upholding
thelaw,butaddedthattheprovisiondoesviolate
therightto family,althoughtheviolationofthe
constitutional right is proportionate, given the
securitycircumstances.84JusticeLevyalsoupheld
thelaw,butadded:Ifchangesarenotmade,the
lawwillbeunlikely tosatisfyjudicialscrutiny in
the future.85Theminorityopinion,deliveredby
Al though the law wasdictated by legitimatesecurity concerns andwritten in "color blind"
terms, the practical effectof this provision was toimpinge upon the familyrights of one particulargroup of citizens andcontradict the classic
liberal understanding of
citizenship rights.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
11/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
11
Justice Barak, on the other hand, found that the
law violated Article 2 and 4 of the Basic Law:
Human Dignity and Liberty (right to family life
and right to equality) and that although
appropriate in its scopebased upon legitimate
security concernsthe law failed tomeet all the
proportionalityrequirements.86
The debate over the Nationality and Entryinto Israel Law did not however end with this
judgment. Adalah filed another petition to the
Supreme Court in June 2007, demanding the
cancellation of the Citizenship and Entry into
Israel Law, in its amended version.87 Following
thepetition, theSupremeCourtinMay 2008
issued an order nisi giving the State 60 days to
explainwhythelawshouldnotbestruckdownas
unconstitutional.88Thegovernmentsubmittedthe
reply inAugust 2008,89but the controversy over
thefreeze
on
family
reunification
has
not
yet
been
settled.
The internaldisagreementsover thescopeof
the Nationality andEntry into IsraelLaw reveal
thedifficulties that Israel facesvisvisadhering
to its constitutive equality provision and liberal
citizenship principles in the face of ongoing
political/security threats and the governments
supreme responsibility to protect its citizens. In
this sense, the Supreme Courtsjudicial scrutiny
could offer a venue by which the Court could
push
the
State
to
modify
the
controversial
law
and restrike a balance in favor of all Israels
citizens.
CONCLUSION
The Israeli citizenship discourse is a
fragmented one. It is composed of diverging
notions of citizenship that maximize different
values and imply radically different
Weltanschauungs. On the one hand, the liberal
citizenship modelwith its universal, general,
and egalitarian underpinningshas been
integrated into the Israeli citizenship discourse
and the countrys normative framework via the
equality clause of the Basic Law: Dignity and
Freedom and by the states commitment todemocracy and equal rights. On the other hand,
theliberaldiscoursealthoughcrucialisnotthe
onlyapplicablecitizenshipmodel. Therepublican
model of active participation and mobilization,
rather than as a simple bundle of individual
rights, is still an important component of the
Israeli discourse on citizenship and political
membership. Furthermore, the predominant
ethnonationalist ethos, as symbolized by laws
suchastheLawofReturn,continuestoshapethe
ideological
and
normative
understanding
of
Israelicitizenship.
The analysis of the evolution of the
Nationality Law in Israel and the case study on
thestatusandrightsofArabIsraelisdemonstrate
how the abovementioned citizenship models
continue toshapeand influence thecurrent legal
framework, which continuously attempts to
accommodate these diverging conceptions and
needs. Often, this framework places pragmatic
needsandflexibilityaboveinternalcoherenceand
consistency.
The views and opinions expressed in articles are
strictly the authors own, and do not necessarily
represent those of al Nakhlah, its Advisory and
EditorialBoards, or theProgramfor SouthwestAsia
and Islamic Civilization (SWAIC) at The Fletcher
School.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
12/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
12
WORKS CITED
1PatrickWeil,AccesstoCitizenship:AComparisonofTwentyfiveNationalityLaws,inT.Alexander
Aleinikoff,DouglasKlusmeyer,CitizenshipToday:GlobalPerspectivesandPractices(Carnegie
EndowmentforDemocracy,2001),18.2
Daniel
Levy,
Changing
Configurations
of
German
and
Israeli
Immigration
Regimesa
Comparative
Perspective,inDanielLevy,YfaatWeissChallengingEthnicCitizenship:GermanandIsraeli
PerspectivesonImmigration(NewYork,Oxford:BerghahnBooks,2002),1.3GershonShafir,YoavPeled,TheDynamicsofCitizenshipinIsraelandtheIsraeliPalestinianPeace
Process,GershonShafir,ed.,TheCitizenshipDebates(Minneapolis,London:Universityof
MinnesotaPress,1998),251.4Ibid,56.
5CassR.Sunstein,BeyondtheRepublicanRevival,YaleLawJournal,98(1988).
6Yishuv(Hebrewwordmeaningsettlement)isthetermusedtodefinetheJewishcommunitiesin
PalestinebeforethebirthofIsraelasaState.7YoavPeled,GershonShafir,TheRootsofPeacemaking:TheDynamicsofCitizenshipinIsrael,1948
93,International
Journal
of
Middle
East
Studies,
28
(3)
(1996),
39
399.
8Ibid.
9AyeletShachar,WhoseRepublic?:CitizenshipAndMembershipInTheIsraeliPolityGeorgetown
ImmigrationLawJournal(1999),260.10
ThesearetwoofthecorepillarsoftheStateofIsrael,andtheyhavebeenintegratedintothenational
ethnossincetheDeclarationofIndependenceof1948andlaterinthe1992BasicLaw:Human
DignityandLiberty(accessed
April29,2007).11
Intheformer,onereads:TheStateofIsraelwillbeopenforJewishimmigrationandforthe
Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its
inhabitants;itwillbebasedonfreedom,justiceandpeaceasenvisagedbytheprophetsofIsrael;it
will
ensure
complete
equality
of
social
and
political
rights
to
all
its
inhabitants
irrespective
of
religion,
raceorsex;itwillguarantee freedomofreligion,conscience, language,educationandculture; it
will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it willbe faithful to the principles of the
CharteroftheUnitedNations.12Ibid.13
See:IrisMarionYoung,PolityandGroupDifference:ACritiqueoftheIdealofUniversalCitizenship,
inGershonShafir,ed.,TheCitizenshipDebate(Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,
1998);WillKymlicka,MulticulturalCitizenship,inGershonShafir,ed.,TheCitizenshipDebate
(Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1998).14
BernardSusser,EliezerDonYehiya,IsraelandtheDeclineoftheNationStateintheWest,Modern
Judaism,Vol.14,No.2,(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1994),191.15
Baruch
Kimmerling,
The
Invention
and
Decline
of
Israeliness,
State,
Society,
and
the
Military
(Berkeley,UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2001),180.Seealso:YoavPeled,EthnicDemocracyand
theLegalConstructionofCitizenship:ArabCitizensoftheJewishStateTheAmericanPolitical
ScienceReview,86(2)(1992),43233.16Kimmerling,180.17
Weil,19.18
OrenYiftachel,TheShrinkingSpaceofCitizenship:EthnocraticPoliticsinIsrael,MiddleEastReport,
223(2002),39.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
13/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
13
19JulesColemanandSarahK.Harding,Citizenship,theDemandsofJustice,andtheMoralRelevanceof
PoliticalBorders,inWarrenFSchwartz,ed.,JusticeinImmigration(Cambridge,UK:Cambridge
UniversityPress,1995),44.20Shachar,235.21
Estimatesrelate
that
between
1948
and
1995,
approximately
2.4
million
people
immigrated
to
Israel,
withthetwomajorimmigrationpeaksintheearlyyearsoftheState(1948troughthelate1950s),
andbetween199095,whenabout700,000peoplearrivedfromtheSovietUnion.SeeGabriel
Lipshitz,CountryontheMove:MigrationtoandwithinIsrael,19481995(Dordrech,ND:Kluwer
AcademicPublisher,1998),23.TounderstandtowhatanextentIsraelcanbedefinedasa
countryofimmigrants,onecouldlookatthefactthatin1996around38percentofthepopulation
ofIsraelwasforeignborn.Thismeansthatoneineverythreecitizenswasanimmigrant.This
dataisevenmoresignificantifwethinkthattheUnitedStatesCensusBureauindicatedthatin
1997onlyoneeverytenUScitizenswasforeignborn.SeeShachar.22Weil,33.23
WillKymlicka,MulticulturalCitizenship,inGershonShafir,ed.,TheCitizenshipDebate
(Minneapolis,MN:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1998),167.24
MarkJ.Altschul,IsraelsLawOfReturnAndTheDebateOfAltering,Repealing,OrMaintainingIts
PresentLanguage,UniversityofIllinoisLawReview,(2002).25
OritIchilov,PoliticalLearningandCitizenshipEducationunderConflict:thePoliticalsocializationof
IsraeliandPalestinianYoungsters(LondonandNewYork:Routledge,2004),96.26
Familylawmattersbecomeespeciallycomplexwhenmembersofdifferentreligiouscommunitiesare
involved.See:MosheChigier,HusbandandWifeinIsraeliLaw(Jerusalem:ArielUnitedIsrael
Institutes,1985).27
IsraeliDefenseForces,DruzeandCircassianPeople,
;IsraeliDefenseForces
BeduinsandArabs,
(accessedFebruary20,2009).28
TheLawofReturn5710(1950)(accessed
April30,2007).29
NationalityLaw,57121952,
(accessed
April30,2007).30DeclarationofIsraelsIndependence1948(TelAviv,May14,1948)
(accessedApril30,2007).31
Shachar,241.32DavidBenGurion,quotedinJulesColemanandSarahK.Harding,Citizenship,theDemandsof
Justice,andtheMoralRelevanceofPoliticalBorders,inWarrenFSchwartz,Justicein
Immigration(Cambridge,UK,CambridgeUniversityPress,1995),21.33IusSanguinispolicydeterminesthatcitizenshipstatusisgrantednotinvirtueofonesplaceofbirth(ius
solis)butonthebasisofthecitizenshipstatusofonesparents.34Thereisanongoingdebateonthestatusofthesebasiclawsvisvisotherlegislativeacts;thelaws,
however,seemtolackatrueconstitutionalstatusastheydontautomaticallytrumplaterin
timelegislation,andtheycanberepealedand/oramendedbytheKnesset.35
MarkJ.Altschul,IsraelsLawOfReturnAndTheDebateOfAltering,Repealing,OrMaintainingIts
PresentLanguage,UniversityofIllinoisLawReview,1345(2002).
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
14/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
14
36Ibid.
37OlehisaJewishImmigrantwhohasmadealiyahtoIsrael.
38InYfaatWeiss,TheGolemanditsCreator,orHowtheJewishNationStateBecameMultiethnic,in
DanielLevy,YfaatWeissChallengingEthnicCitizenship:GermanandIsraeliPerspectiveson
Immigration
(NewYork,
Oxford,
Berghahn
Books,
2002),
83.
39Intheformer,onereads:TheStateofIsraelwillbeopenforJewishimmigrationandforthe\
IngatheringoftheExiles;itwillfosterthedevelopmentofthecountryforthebenefitofallits
inhabitants;itwillbebasedonfreedom,justiceandpeaceasenvisagedbytheprophetsofIsrael;
itwillensurecompleteequalityofsocialandpoliticalrightstoallitsinhabitantsirrespectiveof
religion,raceorsex;itwillguaranteefreedomofreligion,conscience,language,educationand
culture;itwillsafeguardtheHolyPlacesofallreligions;anditwillbefaithfultotheprinciplesof
theCharteroftheUnitedNations.40
PninaLahav,JudgmentinJerusalem,ChiefJusticeSimonAgranatandtheZionistCentury,
(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1997),197220
(accessedMay2,2007).41
Judaism
is
matrilineal
in
its
transmission
of
membership;
hence
the
child
of
a
Jewish
father
and
a
non
Jewishmother,accordingtotheOrthodoxinterpretationofJudaism,isnotconsideredJewish
accordingtotheJewishlaws(halakha).42
LawofReturn(AmendmentNo.2)57301970,
(accessedMay1,2007).43
Ibid.44
Ibid.45
Shachar,24649.46TheauthorityofthethreemainbranchesofJudaismreformed,conservative,andorthodoxto
performconversionsisrecognizedoutsideofIsrael.Onthecontrary,withinthecountry,the
Orthodoxmovementhasthedefactosupremacyonregulatingallpersonalstatusmatters,and,
therefore,any
conversion
performed
outside
the
mainstream
orthodox
system
will
not
be
recognizedasvalid.47
IsraeliHighCourtApprovesConversionsDoneAbroad,JerusalemPost,March31,2005,
(accessedMay
2,2007).48MinistryofForeignAffairs,AcquisitionofIsraeliNationality,August4,1998,
(accessedMay2,2007).49Ibid.50
Shachar,251.51
NationalityLaw,57121952,3(a)3(b).52
Shachar,250.
53Ibid.54
NationalityLaw,5(a):(a)Apersonoffullage,notbeinganIsraelnational,mayobtainIsraelnationality
bynaturalisationif:(1)heisinIsrael;and(2)hehasbeeninIsraelforthreeyearsoutoffiveyears
precedingthedayofthesubmissionofhisapplication;and(3)heisentitledtoresideinIsrael
permanently;and(4)hehassettled,orintendstosettle,inIsrael,and(5)hehassomeknowledge
oftheHebrewlanguage,and(6)hehasrenouncedhispriornationalityorhasprovedthathewill
ceasetobeaforeignnationaluponbecominganIsraelnational.
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
15/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
15
55MinistryofForeignAffairs,AcquisitionofIsraeliNationality.
56Thisishowevergrantedbyarticle6(d)oftheNationalityLaw:
d)TheMinisteroftheInteriormayexemptanapplicantfromalloranyoftherequirementsof
section5(a)(1),(2),(5)and(6)ifthereexistsinhisopinionaspecialreasonjustifyingsuch
exemption.
57Shachar,255256.
58OfficeofLegalCounsel,SurveyoftheLawofExpatriation,June12,2002,748.
59Article11oftheNationalityLaw1952:
(a)AnIsraelicitizenwhounlawfullyexitedIsrael tooneofthecountries listed inArticle2Aof
thePreventionofInfiltrationLaw,1954,(Lebanon,Syria,Egypt,TransJordan,SaudiArabia,Iraq,
Yemenoranypartof EretzYisrael outsideofIsrael)orwhoacquiredcitizenshipofanyofthese
states,willbeperceivedashavingrelinquishedtheirIsraelicitizenshipanditwillberevokedas
of thedayof theirexit;Therevocationof theIsraelicitizenshipofaperson inaccordancewith
thisarticle,revokes theIsraelicitizenshipof theirminorchildwho isnotaresidentofIsraelas
well.
(b)TheMinisterof Interior isauthorized to revoke the Israelicitizenshipofapersonwhohas
committedanact,whichconstitutesofbreachoftrustoftheStateofIsrael.
(c)TheMinisterofInteriorisauthorizedtorevoketheIsraelicitizenshipofapersonifithasbeen
proved tohis satisfaction that thecitizenshipwasgrantedbasedon false facts; theMinisterof
Interiorisauthorizedtodeterminethattherevocationofcitizenshipwillapplytotheminorchild
ofthatperson.
(d)RevokingIsraelicitizenship inaccordancewithsubsection(b)and(c)willbeexecutedbya
priornoticefromtheMinisterofInteriorasofthedatedeterminedbytheMinisterofInteriorin
thecitizenshiprevocationnotification.60
YoavPeled,EthnicDemocracyandtheLegalConstructionofCitizenship:ArabCitizensoftheJewish
State,TheAmericanPoliticalScienceReview,86(2)(1992),435.61
Ibid.62
Ibid,436.63
UriDavis,CitizenshipandtheState:aComparativeStudyofCitizenshipLegislationinIsrael,Jordan,
Palestine,Syria,andLebanon,(Reading,Berkshire,UK,IthacaPress,1997),4950.64
Ibid,5051.65
E.A.1/65,Yeredorv.ChairmanoftheCentralElectionsCommitteefortheSixthKnesset19P.D.(3)365.
(QuotedinMosheNeimanEtAl.v.ChairmanOfTheCentralElectionsCommitteeorTheEleventh
Knesset,IsraeliSupremeCourtSittingasaCourtofElectionAppeals,May15,1985).66Peled,436.67Yeredorv.ChairmanoftheCentralElectionsCommitteefortheSixthKnesset.68
MosheNeimanetAl.V.ChairmanOfTheCentralElectionsCommittee.69
Basic
Law:
the
Knesset
1950,
Amendment
of
Section
7A,
1985,
7A.)Acandidates listshallnotparticipateinelectionstotheKnessetifitsobjectsoractions,
expresslyorbyimplication,includeoneofthefollowing:
(1)negationoftheexistenceoftheStateofIsraelasthestateoftheJewishpeople;
(2)negationofthedemocraticcharacteroftheState;
(3)incitementtoracism.(accessed
April29,2007).70
DemocraticConstitutionofAdalah,TheReutInstitute,
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
16/17
al Nakhlah
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
16
institute.org/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=1626>(accessedMay2,2007).71TheFutureVisionofthePalestinianArabsinIsrael,TheNationalCommitteefortheHeadsoftheArab
LocalAuthoritiesinIsrael,ed.GhaidaRinawieZoabi,2006.72YoavStern,Poll:75%ofIsraeliArabssupportJewish,democraticconstitution,HaAretz,April29,
2007,
(accessed
May
2,
2007).
73IlanSaban,Conference:TheLegalAndSocioEconomicStatusOfArabCitizensInIsrael:
Contribution:MinorityRightsInDeeplyDividedSocieties:AFrameworkForAnalysisAndThe
CaseOfTheArabPalestinianMinorityInIsrael,NewYorkUniversityJournalofInternationalLaw
andPolitics,Summer2004.74
Ibid.75
FamilyunificationandchildregistrationinEastJerusalem,BTselem
(accessedMay2,2007)76
BethanyM.Nikfar,FamiliesDivided:AnAnalysisofIsraelsCitizenshipandEntryintoIsraelLaw,
NorthwesternUniversityJournalofInternationalHumanRights,Spring2005.77
ProposedNationalityandEntryintoIsrael(TemporaryOrder)Law,57632003,June4,2003.78
Family
unification
and
child
registration
in
East
Jerusalem,
BTselem.
79TheNationalityandEntryIntoIsraelLaw(TemporaryOrder)(Amendment)2005,passedbythe
Knesseton27July2005.3.PermitforSpousesNotwithstandingtheprovisionsofArticle2,the
Interior Minister may, at his discretion, approve an application of a resident of the region to
receiveapermittostayinIsraelfromtheregionalcommander (1)regardinga[male]residentof
theregionwhoisoverthirtyfiveyearsoldinordertopreventhisseparationfromhis[female]
spousewho is lawfullystaying in Israel; (2) regardinga [female]residentof theregionwho is
overtwentyfiveyearsold inorder topreventherseparation fromher [male]spousewho is
lawfullystayinginIsrael;803A.PermitforChildrenNotwithstandingtheprovisionsofArticle2,theInteriorMinistermay,athis
discretion(1)grantaresidentoftheregionwhoisunderfourteenyearsoldapermittoresidein
Israel
in
order
to
prevent
his
separation
from
a
parent
who
has
custody
of
him
and
who
is
lawfullystayinginIsrael;(2)approveanapplicationforapermittostayinIsraeltobegrantedby
the regional commander toa residentof the regionwho isaminor andwho isover fourteen
yearsold, inordertopreventhisseparationfromaparentwhohascustodyofhimandwho is
lawfullystayinginIsraelandprovidedthatsuchapermitshallnotberenewediftheminordoes
notliveinIsraelonaregularbasis.81ExtensiontoCitizenshipLawsValidityisLatestinaSeriesofIsraeliPoliciesofRacialSeparation
BasedonNationalBelonging,AdalahCenter,July7,2008
(accessedNovember19,2008).82
SpecialReport:BanonFamilyReunification,AdalahCenter,
(accessedMay2,2007);SeealsoBriefingArticleChallengingtheConstitutionalityofthe
DiscriminatoryNationalityandEntryintoIsraelLaw,AdalahCenter,March2005.83CourtRulingonNationalityLawHCJ7052/03,
(accessedMay2,2007).84
Ibid.85Ibid.86SummaryofCourtRulingonNationalityLawHCJ7052/03,SummarybyAdalahCenter87
AdalahCenter,PressRelease,June6,2007,AdalahPetitionsSupremeCourttoOverturnNew
-
8/12/2019 Berti - The Israeli Citizenship Model
17/17
Spring 2009
The Fletcher School al Nakhlah Tufts University
17
CitizenshipLawBanningFamilyUnification:LawPreventsPalestinianCitizensofIsraelfrom
BeingConnectedtothePalestinianPeopleandMembersoftheArabNation
(accessedJuly2,2007).88
IsraeliSupremeCourt,Ordernisi,5030/07,May5,2008
(accessedNovember13,2008).89
July14,2008(accessedNovember
13,2008).