Retired Supreme Court Justice Tova Strasburg-Cohen, the ombudsperson for the nation’s courts, is calling for the dismissal of Supreme Rabbinical Court Dayan/Justice Rabbi Avrohom Sherman.
Justice Strasburg-Cohen explains she is not at all entering into the legal or halachic aspects of Rabbi Sherman’s verdict in the case of the geirim (converts) of the beis din of Rav Chaim Druckman Shlita, but is calling for the senior official’s removal from office due to his unacceptable conduct in the case.
Cohen makes reference to the fact that after studying the ruling, which has resulted in a national, if not an international storm, she is of the opinion that Rabbi Sherman should have called for certain proofs and witnesses, but did not bother to do so. She also spoke of the language of the high court’s decision, the character assassination of Rav Druckman, which she labels as unsuitable conduct for a justice in such a high position.
Cohen also makes note of the fact that Justice Rabbi Sherman only heard one side of the case, and never bothered to call Rav Druckman in to hear his side of the events first hand.
The call for his dismissal has brought responses of support from the Dati Leumi world, while the chareidi media is in somewhat of a frenzy, viewing the news as an attack against their system, which ironically, is an arm of the state, not the chareidi beis din system.
(Yechiel Spira – YWN Israel)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
5 Responses
Justice “Tova” contradicts herself claiming “she is not at all entering into the legal or halachic aspects of Rabbi Sherman’s verdict” but that “she is of the opinion that Rabbi Sherman should have called for certain proofs and witnesses”. That IS entering into the legal or halachic aspects of the case.
But then again, what more is to be expected from a secular court, with a woman “judge” to boot, thinking its opinions on halachic matters are of any relevance.
Justice “Tova” contradicts herself claiming “she is not at all entering into the legal or halachic aspects of Rabbi Sherman’s verdict” but that “she is of the opinion that Rabbi Sherman should have called for certain proofs and witnesses”. That IS entering into the legal or halachic aspects of the case.
Noting that a dayan does not listen to two sides or witnesses is NOT a legal or halachic aspects it is just using BRAINS. Rav Sherman could have gone about this in a proper derech hatorah and avoided all these complications.
I think it’s a mistate to further politicize this mess. There are better systemic ways to address the problems created by Dayan Sherman. If Dayan Sherman should be disciplined, it should be for deliberately issuing a ruling on a matter not before him; namely the validity of all the conversions performed by the Conversion Court, as opposed to the validity of the one case before him. But that, it would seem, is an internal matter best left to R. Amar to handle. That’s nto to say he should not be removed from the bench; but if he is to be removed, it should be R. Amar’s office
#5,
My point was her self-contradictory statement I made reference to in my first sentence.
It is worthwhile noting, that Rabbi Avrohom Sherman is a past IDF Rabbi and spent a sabbatical at YU. So we are not dealing with some chareidi Rabbi.
The whole business of the conversion business operated by the Israeli Rabbinut stinks to hugh heaven, and you don’t have to look past their own daled amos to see this.
This is regardless of whatever the halachic procedures being followed by these Rabbinut courts (by Rabbi Druckman or Rabbi Sherman) were proper or not (which I haven’t commented on here or previously.)