AI en Translation, Pages 501-525
Page 502
Government of Iraq
Ministry of Justice
Papers Department
Urgent
Number: 4 / 6 / 95
Date: 4 / 2 / 945
Subject: Endowment of Sion Murad Shatoub
To :-
Presidency of the Jewish Community in Baghdad
We request a prompt response to our letter numbered 4 / 6 / 95
and dated 1 / 20 / 945 regarding the subject.
⟦illegible⟧
Director General of Justice
Justice
Note: The subscription is not less than 50 fils per month
Full Address
Private
To the respected Charitable Projects Committee of the Israelite Community
I pay every ⟦six⟧ months at once, and this is provided by me to serve charitable projects
I request to be considered a subscriber in your esteemed committee with a monthly fee of ⟦...⟧ fils
After greetings and respect
Baghdad
At Meir Elias Hospital
His Excellency the Chairman of the respected Israelite Charitable Hospitals Committee
Baghdad
⟦...⟧ 5 / 1 / 53
⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
Page 504
809
1/24/1945
His Eminence the President of the Israeli Religious Court
Baghdad
We attach herewith the original petition submitted to us by the Ministry of Justice
No. 10636 dated 1/18/1945 filed by Heskel Murad
Shantob to express your views on what was stated therein and return it to us
with the answer.
⟦illegible⟧
Head of the Community
Page 505
8119
7 February 945
The Honorable Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
Reference to the petition of Mr. Heskel Murad Shamtob referred to us under number 1636
and dated 18 / 1 / 945.
The Jewish Religious Court in Baghdad replied as follows:
The representative of the plaintiff fiancée in the lawsuit filed in the aforementioned court
had stated that his client is ill and has traveled to Palestine for treatment and that she,
based on the advice of her doctors, requests her fiancé to either come to Palestine to marry
her or to divorce her. However, the petitioner fiancé (the defendant) insisted on
the necessity of his fiancée coming to Iraq and marrying him here. Since it appeared to the court that
his request was inadmissible, it issued its judgment against him while giving him a suitable period either to travel
outside Iraq where he would marry his fiancée based on the necessity established by the court
or to divorce the plaintiff, his fiancée.
Head of the Community
Justice
Page 508
8122
14 February 945
Exalted Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
Reference to the petition of Mr. Rubin Saleh Setti referred to us under number 2430 and dated
1/2/945.
The Jewish Religious Court in Baghdad replied as follows:
The petitioner had obtained, on 11/30/944, a judgment in absentia regarding the disobedience of his wife and a license
to marry another woman after the expiration of the objection and appeal period, and the aforementioned was notified of that
on 12/6/944. However, in the session of 11/13/944, the husband's attorney requested a delay to ask
his client whether he was ready to accept his wife now or not. Therefore, the case was adjourned to
12/20/944, when the husband or his attorney did not attend the hearing, and at the wife's request, the consideration was adjourned
to 12/28/944, during which the husband's attorney stated that his client complies with the court's order
and agrees to accept his wife under certain conditions:
1) The wife is not allowed to leave the house alone and without permission.
2) The wife drops the lawsuit she filed against him before the Court of First Instance.
3) Not to resort to the method of warnings if the wife fails to comply, and to consider her forbidden.
The wife's attorney objected that the third condition is illegal and illegitimate; nevertheless, his client is present
to go to the legal home. Furthermore, the lawsuit filed before the Court of First Instance has no connection to this
lawsuit. Due to the presence of the wife herself in court, the court warned her of the necessity of going to her
husband's house and that she has no right to leave it without the permission of the husband or the court, provided she is accompanied by one of her daughters
or the woman appointed as an arbitrator between the spouses. The court also charged both parties with delaying the follow-up
of the civil case for a period of two months and left the case until both parties review it. However, on
1/1/945, the lawyer Salim Salton, the attorney for the wife, appeared before the court stating that the husband
had proposed to a woman using the permission issued to him by the court on 11/30/944 under the number
and that his client had requested and is still requesting concerning the legal home.
As a result of the hearing held on 11/16/945, the court decided to rule that the husband must pay
alimony to his wife and notify the marriage contract official not to write a marriage contract for the aforementioned with his fiancée, as he
Rubin Saleh Setti
Rubin Saleh Setti
Justice
Page 509
He married over his wife without permission from the court. If the court sees that the wife
according to Israeli law has the right not to be ruled as disobedient, and before another marriage occurs
for the husband after the ruling against her and before twelve months have passed since then, she may show
her remorse and her desire to return to the husband's house. Since the wife was notified of the ruling
of disobedience issued against her on 6/12/944, and since the aforementioned showed in
the session held on 28/12/944, i.e., before the prescribed appeal period had passed,
her readiness to go to the husband's house, and in view of the reconciliation that took place between
the husband and wife on the mentioned day, the court considers that the permission issued by it
on 30/11/944 has become implicitly canceled and the husband has no right to use it, and even
assuming the lack of compliance from his wife, it was necessary for him to attend the court
and confirm this matter, and perhaps his proceeding to the engagement before this matter was officially verified
is considered an incorrect act by the husband according to Sharia; therefore, it issued its ruling in the manner in which
the petitioner submitted his complaint about it.
President of the Court
Religion of Baghdad
Head of the Community
Page 510
The Iraqi Government
Ministry of Justice
Judicial Inspection Department
Number / 27
Date 9 Rabi' I / 1364 AH
4 March / 1945 AD
To the Honorable Presidency of the Jewish Community
A legal inquiry is required regarding the following case:
If a couple disagrees regarding impotence, whose word is taken? And if there are
medical reports, are those medical testimonies considered or ignored
and the word of one of the litigants is sufficient? Please clarify that by citing the text
and its reference.
⟦signature⟧
Judicial Inspector
Majal
Page 511
The Rabbinical Court of the Community
Baghdad, May God Protect It
Jewish Religious Court Baghdad
JEWISH RELIGIOUS COURT
BAGHDAD
Telephone Number 3456
Number: 7 Number
Date: ⟦illegible⟧ 19 September 947
7 Date
Moshe son of Yosef Sasson and his wife Naima daughter of Selim Sasson
Agreed between them of their own free will
In these words
Since there is constant quarreling between them, they have therefore agreed
to a divorce and have accepted this judgment upon themselves and upon
this they have signed - and a redeemer shall come to Zion
⟦signature⟧
Receipt 854 Article 7 Ibn Shaya Kir
Khalaf Khedhouri (Ibn Shaya Kir)
Page 512
8159
6 March 945
Ministry of Justice
Judicial Inspection Department
Baghdad
Reference to your letter No. 27 dated 4 March 945
If the spouses differ in attributes, the word shall be that of the wife
And that is according to Chapter 154, Article 7 of the book (Ibn Abidin)
Furthermore, medical reports are not sufficient in this matter as the wife
is to be believed
⟦illegible⟧
Alawi
Head of the Community
Judicial Papers
Page 513
8/18 AD
35 T L 2
Assistant Governor
Chief Clerk of the Baghdad Court of Appeal
Respected
On November 26, 1935
Based on your request attached to your letter numbered ⟦1611⟧
(File No. ⟦131⟧) for the year 935, we send you herewith the marriage contract register
containing the marriage contract conducted between Rafla Lawi Shalom and the girl Zakia daughter of
⟦...⟧
President of the Spiritual Court
for the Mosaic Community in Baghdad
Issued on ⟦...⟧
Page 514
8228
July 26, 945
The Honorable Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
With reference to your letter No. 4 / 6 / 945 addressed to the Chief Rabbi
We attach herewith the three files related to the lawsuit of Nazima Daoud Blass
and her fiancé Heskel Murad Shatoub. The first file numbered 705 / 91
contains (64) papers, and the second file belonging to the first contains
(27) papers, both of which belong to the Religious Court. As for the third file numbered
(361) which contains (11) papers, it belongs to the Spiritual Court of Cassation.
Please return them to us after you have finished reviewing them.
Sassoon
Head of the Community
Justice
Page 515
Article 29 of the Sharia Courts Regulation of 1918 as amended by the Amendment Regulation
of the Courts Regulations of 1941.
"It is not permissible to object to the decisions or rulings of the Court of Cassation unless
there is ambiguity, a clear error, an apparent contradiction, or if they were obtained <del>by</del> through forgery or
deception; in such cases, the Court of Cassation may re-examine them at the request of one
of the parties and after obtaining permission from the Minister of Justice. The Minister of Justice may also
return the ruling to the Court of Cassation on his own initiative for re-examination if there are
justifiable reasons for doing so."
Commentary
The Minister's authority to re-examine the rulings of the Court of Cassation is unlimited
because he can request it whenever it appears to him that there are justifiable reasons for it, but <del>⟦illegible⟧</del>
the difference between this article and the specific article of the Community Law Amendment Law
is that the reconsideration here is carried out by the same Court of Cassation, whereas there it is carried out by another council.
Page 517
See Articles
18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23
of the Religious Courts Law 1918
Also
I believe the best thing in this regard is to
summon the wife's representative, the lawyer Mr.
Larif Zana, to consult with him on this matter
since the case has been returned to the Court of First Instance
to be reconsidered, and the lawyer can convince the court
of his point of view so it insists on its previous decision
Darwish
I am ready to meet Mr. Larif Zana, the lawyer, if
His Excellency the President summons him for this purpose
Adli
Page 518
( 7 )
In the name of the Court of Cassation
⟦illegible⟧
And establishing that the custody of the girl to her mother lasts until the age of marriage based
on the response letter received from the Presidency of the Academic Press, numbered 8129 and dated
October 21, 1947, as it became clear from the response of the Medical College signed
by the mother and that she was afflicted with epilepsy, which does not affect her mental state
⟦illegible⟧ the plaintiff's request to appoint ⟦illegible⟧
And for the defendant's failure to follow up ⟦illegible⟧ the case was heard by the Personal Matters Court
Upon scrutiny and deliberation, it appeared that ⟦illegible⟧ so that the Personal Matters Court is bound
And it was not one of the issues entrusted to be drawn by the Press ⟦illegible⟧ there is no difference in it, so it was
But the confusion occurs in its ruling that ⟦illegible⟧ from custody is specific, not ⟦illegible⟧
In this case, it must be considered by the Personal Matters Court and judged
From another side, the plaintiff states that the defendant is afflicted with epilepsy
To refer the case with the evidentiary papers to all the Personal Matters Court regarding this aspect incidentally
Accordingly, it was decided to overturn the appealed judgment and return the papers to the control of the lawsuit according to the
Followed procedures and Islamic laws
⟦illegible⟧
Registered on September 17 ⟦illegible⟧
Her journey ⟦illegible⟧
Signed ⟦illegible⟧
Page 519
7 / 6 / 1945
⟦illegible⟧
His Eminence, the Head of the Jewish Community in Baghdad, the Respected,
We present to your Excellency today a case of importance and gravity - a case that touches the core of social life
and the family unity of the Jewish community - a case that, although simple in appearance, contains everything related
to the Jewish group in terms of good and evil, or vice and virtue -
O President - you know that the Court of Cassation previously issued on 23 / 5 / 1945, under
cassation file number (26 / 45), a decision involving the forfeiture of the Jewish mother's right to custody if
the girl reaches nine years of age, following the Hanafi Sharia - this is the summary of the decision -
It appears that the Court of Cassation did not give our Sharia any significant importance in resolving this issue, which requires
the continuation of the mother's right to custody of the Jewish girl until marriage for reasons and considerations of importance in
our Mosaic Law as everyone knows it - and specifically, the Court of Cassation also did not notice the Sharia
rules, the observed laws, and the proclamations issued in this regard that are in force at the present time
and supported by several previous cassation decisions - and here I list Proclamation No. (6) which clarifies what we mentioned
above, which is the proclamation issued by the Commander-in-Chief during the occupation, and it is among the set of proclamations observed
at the present time and issued from March 11, 1917, until September 30, 1923, and we find
items No. (13) and (16) of the aforementioned proclamation refer to our subject, and here I list
these two items verbatim:
1- Item 13 of the aforementioned proclamation, its text is as follows:
(If issues related to basic personal matters appear in lawsuits filed in the Civil Court
as explained above - the court shall rule according to the personal law - or the customs observed at
the time the incident occurred between the two parties, provided that such personal law or custom is
consistent with justice, equity, and conscience and has not been changed or abolished by a competent authority.
2- Item 16 of the aforementioned proclamation, its text is as follows:
(If the lawsuit or transaction presented to the Civil Court requires a ruling on matters that must
be resolved according to Item 13 of this aforementioned proclamation under a personal law or custom - and it is not
within the jurisdiction of the Islamic Sharia Court - the court shall send these matters to one of the ⟦...⟧ spiritual
scholars, provided that he is competent and has knowledge of that - but if the entire lawsuit needs
to be resolved according to that personal law or custom, the court may entrust ⟦...⟧ that lawsuit to
the aforementioned scholar.
From these two items, it is mandatory for the Personal Status Court, when adjudicating its personal lawsuits,
(To be continued)
(2)
By applying the basic personal law of that sect, the inquiry regarding these matters to be resolved
among the spiritual scholars of that sect -
We also note that the phrasing of these two items ⟦from the declaration⟧ above came in an absolute form and did not refer to the necessity of following
religious legal rules when resolving these personal matters - which makes, in this case,
the decision of the aforementioned Court of Cassation in the custody case ⟦contrary⟧ to the aforementioned statement in total contradiction
considering that it is not based on an established legal rule and does not agree with the basic legal provisions and conditions specific
to the Israelite law that must be followed in this regard, which states (that
the right of custody of a Jewish girl is not forfeited from her mother except upon her marriage) - and although the cassation decision
mentioned above is indeed correctable by the known legal method (and to prevent the aforementioned decision from being taken
as a general rule that must be followed in the future in the courts, it was found ⟦necessary⟧ to entrust the resolution of this
case to your leadership, hoping that your Eminence will take interest in this serious subject after presenting this petition of mine
to the community council for study and directing it to a special committee from the aforementioned council to take what is necessary legally and religiously
in this regard as quickly as possible, and then reviewing the competent departments, especially the Ministry of Justice, regarding this
matter by your leadership directly or by whoever represents you in the committee collectively - and by this you will record
in the page of the Israelite community a great service that will be remembered and thanked, and you will save Israelite girls from misery
and frightening deterioration and pull them from darkness to light, and this is not too much for you as you enjoy the seat
of judgment and justice -
This is what I had ⟦to present⟧ in my capacity as a member of the Israelite community who is jealous for its interests and monitors
its social ailments closely - this, and you have from me much gratitude and veneration.
The Petitioner - Sincerely
Lawyer Isaac Levy
Page 520
Iraqi Government
Ministry of Justice
Please refer to the general number
Editing Department ⟦line⟧
General Number A / 14 - 2472
Telegraphic Address: Justice
Date: May 19 / 1945 AD
Rubin Saleh
Subject Summary: The case of Saleh Rubin Sabti
To " -
The Jewish Religious Court in Baghdad
Rubin Saleh
After your court decided the recalcitrance of the wife of <del>Saleh Rubin</del> Sabti and issued a ruling
permitting the husband to marry another woman, it then issued a contradictory decision, and this
is a matter that violates the principles and foundations of Sharia and the law and robs people's confidence in the justice
of the court. This is on one hand, and on the other hand, the court has violated the provisions of
Sharia and logic in its second decision, where it explained in the justifying reasons
that the wife was stalling her husband in obedience, then decided to obligate the husband to pay alimony of
(25) Dinars per month. If the wife is stalling and not obeying, how can it be permissible for the court
to decide alimony for her?
This decision contains anomalies and legal and Sharia violations, so it must be
reconsidered.
Minister of Justice
⟦signature⟧
A copy of it to " -
Judicial Inspection Department - reference to report No. T/13 / 1945
dated 4 / 29 / 1945.
Presidency of the Jewish Community in Baghdad - reference to its letter No.
8133 dated 2 / 14 / 1945.
S. M.
Justice
⟦illegible⟧
7/2/53210
⟦...⟧ 17 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧ 17 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧ 17 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧ 66/5/5321 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧ (31) and (61) ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
: ⟦...⟧ 61 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
: ⟦...⟧ 31 ⟦...⟧
⟦...⟧
Page 521
Our court has issued <del>its judgment</del> its judgment regarding this will
according to what it has <del>judgment</del> and pursuant to the provisions of Mosaic Law.
As for the reconsideration of the decisions of the religious courts, it is carried out
in the manner stipulated in paragraph 2 of Article
fifteen of the Sect Law No. 77 of the year 1921.
<del>And there is no doubt that ⟦illegible⟧</del>
Secretary of the Fatwa
Its judgment in this
will
⟦illegible⟧
⟦illegible⟧
Page 522
22 May 945
The Honorable Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
Our court has issued its judgment in this case according to
its conviction and in accordance with the provisions of the Mosaic Law. As for the reconsideration
of the decisions of the religious courts, it is carried out in the manner stipulated
in paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Community Law No.
77 of 1931.
Head of the Community
Page 523
The Israeli Religious Court
Baghdad
Number
Date: May 22, 1945
His Eminence Rabbi Sassoon Khedouri, the respected
President of the Jewish Community - Baghdad
Reference to the Ministry of Justice letter No. A / 270 / 43 dated
May 19, 1945, referred to us.
Our court has issued its judgment in this case according to
its conviction and in accordance with the provisions of Mosaic Law. As for the reconsideration of
the decisions of the religious courts, it is carried out in the manner stipulated in paragraph
3 of Article 15 of the Community Law No. 77 of the year 1931.
⟦illegible signature⟧
President of the Court
Page 524
8259
24 May 945
6/6
The Honorable Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
With reference to your letter No. A / 270 / 43 dated 19 May 945 to
the Jewish Religious Court in Baghdad and a copy thereof to us.
The Jewish Religious Court in Baghdad has informed us that it has issued its judgment
in this case according to its conviction and in accordance with the provisions of Mosaic Law. As for
the reconsideration of the decisions of the religious courts, it is carried out in the manner stipulated
in paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the Community Law No. 77 of the year
1931.
Harun
Head of the Community
Justice
Page 525
8228
10 May 945
His Excellency Mr. Antoine Shammash, Respectfully
Legal Codification - Ministry of Justice
Baghdad
After greetings
Based on your Excellency's request, we enclose herewith a photograph of the report
of Dr. M. Hess in Jerusalem regarding the named Nazima Daoud Balash, attached
with the certification of the Iraqi Consulate in Jerusalem. Please return it to us after finishing
with it.
With highest respect to your Excellency;
On behalf of
Head of the Community
⟦Sassoon⟧
Justice