October 2, 2008

By Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz Correspondent 
 
State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss has said that the government acted properly when it decided to limit the number of Falashmura (descendants of Ethiopian Jews who converted to Christianity) entering Israel, and stop bringing members of the community here.

At the same time, Lindenstrauss proposed to the government that, for humanitarian reasons, it should examine the eligibility for immigration of some 3,200 additional Falashmura who have yet to be scrutinized.

The state comptroller was asked 10 months ago to issue a ruling on the government's conduct regarding Falashmura immigration, at the behest of the Knesset's State Control Committee. As part of his investigation of the issue, Lindenstrauss, a former judge, visited the Falashmura compounds in Ethiopia. 
 
The comptroller was asked to look into two aspects of the issue. First: Did the government renege on its decision in principle from 2003 to allow the arrival of Falashmura members who fit the criteria for family reunifications and were born of "the seed of Israel," when two years later it decided to limit the number of Falashmura who would immigrate to Israel and stopped bringing them altogether this year? And second: Was there a contradiction between the 26,000 potentially eligible Falashmura immigrants ascertained by a survey carried out in 1999, and the 17,000 on the list prepared by the Interior Ministry in 2003?

Lindenstrauss effectively accepted the ministries' and Jewish Agency's position on both counts. Regarding the government decisions, he stated that there was an apparent contradiction between the two decisions and they should have been phrased more meticulously, but that in practice there was nothing preventing the government from taking a decision about the Falashmura's eligibility to immigrate and at a later stage taking an "operative" decision to limit their number.

Regarding the gaps between the lists of those eligible, the comptroller said that the existence of two separate lists was known to decision makers all along, and while there is no clear explanation for the contradiction, it can be attributed, among other things, to the great difficulty in obtaining exact figures about the various population groups in Ethiopia.

The comptroller rejected the claims of the politicians and organizations acting on behalf of the Falashmura that demand the government continues to bring them here and, as a first step, examine the eligibility for immigration of 8,700 Falashmura who, the organizations say, are currently in the compounds in Gondar in northern Ethiopia.

The comptroller also received data prepared by the Jewish Agency and first published about three months ago, which included a follow-up on some 29,000 people who expressed the wish to come to Israel - and from whose midst some 23,000 did indeed immigrate.

Basing himself on these data, Lindenstrauss proposed that the government considers re-examining, for "humanitarian" reasons, the eligibility of 3,2000 Falashmura mentioned in the 1999 survey but whose eligibility was not examined because they did not submit requests to immigrate, or on whose behalf no requests for immigration were submitted as part of family reunions.

Lindenstrauss believes that it will be difficult to trace some of them, while the examination will reveal that some are not eligible. He writes, however, that despite the fact that "from an administrative point of view the government's decision is valid and the significance is that the list should not be reopened," nevertheless "from the humanitarian point of view" it is worthwhile considering an additional examination.

Lindenstrauss' opinion is in keeping with the High Court of Justice's recommendation from January stating that the government "would do wisely" to examine the eligibility of additional members of the Falashmura, so that it will be possible to allow another 1,100 to immigrate here and reach the quota of 17,000 stipulated in the government decision from 2005.

Last week, the government decided "as an extraordinary gesture" to act according to the High Court recommendation, and in the coming months the Interior Ministry will examine the eligibility of additional Falashmura in order to allow about a thousand additional members who meet the criteria to immigrate to Israel.

What the comptroller did not ask

Perhaps not keeping with the way he usually acts, the state comptroller limited himself to preparing the report about Falashmura immigration, and in no way went beyond the questions addressed to him by the Knesset committee. It is not clear for what reason Lindenstrauss chose not to extend his purview, but it is sufficient to hear a few sentences and facts from the report - which is, in fact, a review of the continuum of decisions taken on the Falashmura issue since 1991.

The comptroller notes that it was extremely easy to forge family reunion requests and identification documents. To what extent did the interior ministry and Jewish Agency act to ensure that thousands of Ethiopians who are not eligible to come to Israel, did not in fact come by means of some forgery?

According to the report, thousands of Falashmura came to Israel before the government decision approving their immigration, beyond the fixed quotas. Why were clearer criteria not set to decide which relatives were eligible to immigrate to Israel following the arrival here, or the conversion, of a family member?

What was the role of various private organizations in encouraging the Falashmura to leave their villages for the camps in Addis Ababa and Gondar, despite the lack of a promise from Israel that they would be brought to this country?

Why did the government not take into account the position of the veteran Ethiopian community living in Israel, many of whom claim that most of the Falashmura were Christians without connections to the Jewish people, and therefore should not be brought here?

In view of this position, why did the government accept the point of view of Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar, who stated that the Falashmura are indeed Jews?

As noted, Lindenstrauss hints in his report at all these issues, but for some reason decides in this case not to open a Pandora's box that could cast doubt on the validity of the citizenship of tens of thousands of Israelis of Ethiopian origin.