Notes on the Anomaly of the Shari'a Field in Israel

Abstract

A close scrutiny of the Islamic religious field in Israel reveals that those responsible for the application of shari'a rules (i.e. judges presiding in shari'a courts), do not possess the "symbolic capital" that is required in order to distinguish them from laymen. Since shari'a judges in Israel enjoy unprecedented centrality within the Islamic religious field, the field itself is not well-distinguished from the secular legal field. is situation results not only from the fact that persons without proper shari'a training have been appointed to the office of shari'a judge (qadi), but also from the fact that the qadis are appointed by a non-Muslim authority and that the shari'a courts are subordinated to Israeli legislation. I argue that the Islamic religious field in Israel is an anomaly, characterized by lack of autonomy, ambiguous boundaries and lack of competition between actors (due to the monopolization of power by qadis).Keywords qadi, Israeli shari'a courts, Bourdieu, Islamic religious field, shari'a education, Muslims in Israel In this essay I describe and explain how the lack of religious autonomy for Muslim citizens of Israel has resulted in a non-Muslim sovereign state appointing judges (qadis) to preside over the shari'a courts. I further argue that the shari'a judges have virtually monopolized the shari'a field in Israel and that, in Bourdieusian terms,

Kadijustiz in the ecclesiastical courts: Naming, blaming, reclaiming

“…The domain of family law in contemporary Israel can be described as a personal status regime, that is, a legal‐institutional arrangement that imbues communal‐religious courts with jurisdiction in matters related to the personal status of their respective community members (Abou Ramadan, 2006, 2008; Blecher‐Prigat & Zafran, 2017; Galanter & Krishnan, 2000; Halperin‐Kaddari, 2004; Sezgin, 2004; Yefet, 2009, 2016; Zafran, 2013). These confessional tribunals are legally empowered to exercise their jurisdictional authority over all Israeli residents who belong to the respective faith by birth/baptism or conversion, either exclusively in matters of marriage and divorce or alongside civil family courts in other core family matters (Abou Ramadan, 1997, 2000; Amir, 2016, 2018; Edelman, 1994; Halperin‐Kaddari, 2004; Hacker, 2012; Sezgin, 2004, 2010; Yefet, 2009, 2016; Zafran, 2013).…”

“…80–81). This rift is nowhere more salient than in the Greek Orthodox community, where the communal tribunals are controlled by foreign Greek clergy who share neither the language nor the culture of their constituents, and who are alienated from the local Arab‐Palestinian laity and resented by it (Abou Ramadan, 2008, p. 89; Amir, 2014, p. 63; Mack, 2012; Maggiolini, 2016; McGahern, 2011, pp. 42, 81; Tshimhoni, 1993, pp.…”