< September 2005 > Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
CHIEF RABBI OF THE FEDERATION OF SYNAGOGUES
I have this week written to the President of the Federation of Synagogues in London asking him and his fellow Honorary Officers to fill the vacant office of "Rav Rashi" - Chief Rabbi - of the Federation.
In my letter I reminded the President (Mr Alan Findlay) that the last holder of this office was the late Dayan Michael Fisher.
The need for this office remains as strong now as at the time of its inception - if not stronger. As the Federation grows, and as its influence is felt more keenly in circles beyond the immediate confines of Anglo-Jewry, it needs a public focus, embodied in a rabbi of great sagacity with a strong national profile. "The office has remained vacant for far too long [I have said]. It should be filled without further delay."
MRS HELEN SAGAL
The following statement was issued on Friday 05 August 2005 by Professor Geoffrey Alderman: "A month ago the Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, publicly declared that he was unable to accept the validity of Mrs Helen Sagal's conversion effected by the official rabbinical authorities in Israel some fifteen years ago.
Prior to his delivery of this judgment I has applied, on Mrs Sagal's behalf, to the London Beth Din [over which Sir Jonathan presides] for the delivery to us of copies of every document in its possession relating to her case. This application was made on 20 June 2005 under the provisions of the Data Protection Act, 1998. Accordingly, that Act gave the Clerk to the Beth Din, Mr David Frei, 40 days to comply with this application.
On Saturday 30 July, some 41 days after the application, I received a package of materials from Mr Frei. These include notes handwritten by various Dayanim [Judges] relating to the case, and give a unique insight into the motives that led the Beth Din to advise Sir Jonathan to reject the validity of Mrs Sagal's conversion. They also include hitherto unpublished correspondence, in Hebrew, between the religious authorities in London and Jerusalem.
I am sorry to say that this material confirms my original suspicion that the Beth Din was determined to find a reason for rejecting the validity of Mrs Sagal's conversion. It also casts doubt on the claim made by Sir Jonathan that the religious authorities in Israel had somehow transferred to his Beth Din in London the authority to determine Mrs Sagal's Jewish status, perhaps with a view to revoking it. Especially revealing is a letter in Hebrew, marked "Not for Publication," from Dayan Menachem Gelley, of the Beth Din, to the Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, Rabbi Amar (14 April 2005), asking that the authority to determine Mrs Sagal's Jewish status be transferred to the London Beth Din. No such sanction was in fact ever given.
Mrs Sagal holds both British and Israeli citizenship. In Israel her status as a Jewess remains unimpaired.
Having obtained provisional but authoritative legal advice, I can now announce that Mrs Sagal is actively considering instituting legal proceedings, either against Sir Jonathan for alleged defamation [inasmuch as he has denied, in public and in writing, that she is Jewish], and/or against him and/or his Beth Din (or certain members of the Beth Din) is respect of the alleged denial to her of her human rights.
I should add that the successful use in this case of rights conferred under the Data Protection Act is, I am told, the first occasion on which the Act has been invoked against a Beth Din in this country. I am also pleased to report that, subsequently, the Act has been invoked - also against the London Beth Din - in relation to a second, similar case in which I am advising." [Note for Editors: Mrs Sagal, who lives with her Israeli husband and family in North London, was converted to Orthodox Judaism by the official ecclesiastical authorities in Israel in 1990. Last December, in connection with the application Mr & Mrs Sagal had made for their eldest son, Guy, to be admitted to the Jews' Free School, Kenton, the Office of the Chief Rabbi in London declined to accept the validity of this conversion.]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MRS HELEN SAGAL
Statement by Professor Geoffrey Alderman
The following statement was issued on Wednesday 06 July 2005 by Professor Geoffrey Alderman following a meeting that took place between Mr and Mrs Sagal and the Chief Rabbi to further explore the refusal of the Office of the Chief Rabbi to recognise Mrs Sagal's conversion effected in Israel some fifteen years ago. "On Tuesday evening, 05 July 2005 I accompanied Mrs Helen Sgal and her husband, Israeli-born Mr Raoul Sagal, to a meeting with the Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks. The Chief Rabbi was accompanied by one of his Dayanim (Judges), Rabbi Ivan Binstock, and the Executive Director of his Office, Mrs Syma Weinberg. The meeting, which had been requested by the Chief Rabbi, took place in Mrs Weinberg's private residence, and lasted approximately 90 minutes.
At the meeting Sir Jonathan made a statement intended to justify the view that he and his Beth Din {Ecclesiastical Court] had taken, that the validity of Mrs Sagal's conversion effected in Israel could not be accepted. He offered to personally oversee a fresh conversion process involving Mrs Sagal, her two sons and her as yet unborn child (whose birth is imminent), with the aim of establishing Mrs Sagal's Jewish status "beyond doubt."
Sir Jonathan acknowledged that his Office had authorised the ritual circumcision of Mr & Mrs Sagal's elder son, Guy, without bothering to inquire into the circumstances of Mrs Sagal's conversion.
The Chief Rabbi admitted that there had been serious deficiencies in the way his Office had handled the Sagal case, for which he apologised, and announced that one of his officials had been formally reprimanded. I welcomed this admission and offered my services, free, to put in place fresh administrative procedures that would ensure that the requirements of natural justice and English law were complied with in future such cases.
As to the matter of substance, I pointed out that irrespective of any view the Chief Rabbi personally might hold of the manner in which Mrs Sagal's conversion had been effected in Israel, the fact was that that conversion had not been revoked. I asked for an undertaking that if Mrs Sagal were to agree to a re-conversion in England, the Chief Rabbi would meanwhile give his certification to the Jews' Free School for the purpose of permitting her elder son, Guy, to enter this school in September. I regret that this undertaking was not forthcoming.
Mr Sagal and I both observed that the evident effect of the decision not to recognise, in England, Mrs Sagal's conversion in Israel must be to call into question hundreds - perhaps thousands - of Israeli conversions and to cause anguish to many Israeli families.
Whilst I am grateful - and said so - for the ongoing personal involvement of the Chief Rabbi in this case, I am very disappointed with the outcome thus far. We are in fact no further forward now than we were six months ago. I have therefore advised Mr & Mrs Sagal to seek immediate redress in the English courts. [Note for Editors: Mrs Sagal, who lives with her Israeli husband and family in North London, was converted to Orthodox Judaism by the official ecclesiastical authorities in Israel in 1990. Last December, in connection with the application Mr & Mrs Sagal had made for their elder son, Guy, to be admitted to the Jews' Free School, Kenton, the Office of the Chief Rabbi in London declined to accept the validity of this conversion.]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUT BOYCOTT OF BAR ILAN AND HAIFA UNIVERSITIES
PERSONAL STATEMENT BY PROFESSOR GEOFFREY ALDERMAN
AUT BOYCOTT OF BAR ILAN AND HAIFA UNIVERSITIES
PERSONAL STATEMENT BY PROFESSOR GEOFFREY ALDERMAN
The following statement was issued by Professor Geoffrey Alderman in London, England, on Monday night, 25 April 2005, following the decision by the Association of University Teachers, taken at the AUT's Annual Conference on Friday 22 April, to boycott the Universities of Bar Ilan and Haifa: "I am an AUT member of some 36 years' standing, and a former Chair of its London Committee.
I am shocked and saddened that at its annual conference last week, timed to coincide with the eve of the Passover fesival, the Association saw fit to pass two ill-considered and spiteful resolutions calling on AUT members to boycott two Israeli universities.
Leaving aside the legality of what the resolutions propose, in terms of relevant anti-discrimination, equal opportunities and employment legislation, I am saddened that the AUT has allowed itself to be used as the tool of those whose agenda is aimed at the denial of the right of Jewish national self-determination and I am shocked at the assault on academic freedom that these resolutions embody.
Academic freedom is about the free exchange of ideas. The record of Israeli universities in this regard is very strong - much stronger than the oppressive record of universities in the Arab and Islamic states that surround Israel, but about which the AUT seems unconcerned.
I understand that, following the passage of these resolutions, some colleagues have resigned their AUT membership. I do not intend to do so. Instead, I call upon my fellow AUT members to ignore the resolutions and to treat them with the contempt they deserve."
Welcome to the new site.