Petition against courts: Avoid Forced Circumcision

Legal Aid Department at the Ministry of Justice, through attorney Marsala Wolf Avigdor Feldman, filed shortly before a petition on behalf of a woman found in divorce conflict, a conditional order ordering the cancellation of a judgment of the Supreme Rabbinical Court.

This ruling, which ratified the verdict of the Rabbinical Court, ordered the woman in the process of divorce to cooperate and allow the father to perform a circumcision on their one year old son, and approved the imposition of a fine on the woman 500 ₪ per day if she will not cooperate.

The petition deals with the authority of the rabbinical court wrap for divorce the issue of circumcision of the minor son of the couple. Petitioner, represented through the Legal Aid Department, the petition claims that this is the first time establishes a rabbinical court that is empowered to order the execution of circumcision and the rabbinical court exceeded its authority when discussing the father's request on the circumcision of a minor.

Another petition states that noting the fact that the Supreme Court refrained until now from determining that the issue of children's education is an issue that can bind a divorce suit, let alone the issue of circumcision, in all its physical and surgical and outcome irreversible, cannot be lumped in a divorce suit, discussed in rabbinical position on this is known in advance, as has been reflected in its rulings in this petition.

Also petitioner argues that the petition that the Rabbinical Court acted contrary to the rules of natural justice , as given the decision surprisingly, after the father raised his desire of circumcision for the first time during the hearing on the conflict divorce , without given the petitioner a proper opportunity to defend herself before the father's request .

According to the petitioner, was not conducted in the rabbinical courts proper and thorough discussion about the child's interests and rights. Moreover, the issue of editing or non- word editing in the shade of the constitutional right to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, and to be harmed only by virtue of the explicit - and this is not so in this case. Another argument is that by severe economic sanctions carried out unlawfully and contrary to the required procedure.

The petition raises a fundamental question , about the right to parent and be circumcised , against his will , freedom of religion , the right to disagree whether her son and to act according to conscience and lifestyle physical action opposing the circumcision on male babies.

It is important to note that the petition does not take a position one way or another on the issue of circumcision itself as a religious obligation paramount for many Jews. The petition focused on questions of law - The authority of the Rabbinical Court of discussing the circumcision. As indicated in the petition, if you stay taking this authority of the rabbinical courts in place, its immediate effect will be labor of making a surgical procedure, which results in irreversible stated, minor son over a year, not because of any medical need of the child, but by virtue of the purely religious imperative.

In addition, the Court was asked to grant a temporary injunction ordering the stay of execution of penalties and injunction imposed on the petitioner to enable circumcision, by the end of the hearing and to require the respondents in court costs and legal fees.

Amnon Givoni, Head of Matrimonial Legal Aid Department Haifa: "This is a precedent-setting issue still to be decided. Circumcision or not is a weighty question, and it is fitting that it will be discussed in depth in all its aspects and implications, irrespective of the question of the couple's divorce. "

'בחדרי' גם ברשתות החברתיות - הצטרפו!