AI en Translation, Pages 126-150
Page 126
⟦illegible⟧
562 on ⟦21⟧ / 6 / 956 in ⟦656⟧ on ⟦21⟧ / 6 / 956
Committee for the Care of the Affairs of the Mosaic Community in Baghdad
Report
Regarding the incident that occurred in Mosul
On 21 / 6 / 956 at approximately 18:00, a dispute occurred in the ⟦Al-Sheikh⟧ neighborhood in Mosul between persons from the Mosaic
community and persons from the Muslims.
Boys from the community (3 - 7) years old were playing in the alley, then Muslim boys came and started hitting the boys from
the Mosaic community with stones. The mother of one of the boys from the Mosaic community came out and began to defend her young son, then the mother of one of the boys
from the Muslims came out and began hitting the Mosaic woman. A large crowd of Muslims gathered and began hitting the Mosaic woman and her children and began insulting
the Mosaic community with profane words and began throwing stones at the house of the aforementioned woman and began threatening the Mosaic community with killing and looting.
This situation continued until 17:00 on 22 / 6 / 956, and the Mosaic woman and her children suffered various injuries.
The police were informed of the incident at the time, so they dispersed the crowds and began monitoring the situation in the mentioned area. The
situation remained calm until 18:00 on 23 / 6 / 956, when the Muslim boys returned and began throwing stones at the house of the aforementioned woman
and began insulting the Mosaic community with profane words. The police were informed of the incident at the time and they dispersed the crowds.
⟦signature⟧
Chairman of the Committee for the Care of the Affairs of the Mosaic Community
A copy of it to His Excellency the General Military Governor in Baghdad for information and review
Page 128
16 / 6 / 52
Presidency of the Jewish Community in Baghdad
Presidency of the Baghdad Court of Appeal
16 / 6 / 52 ⟦Number⟧ 8086 ⟦Based⟧ on ⟦Request⟧
In the lawsuit numbered 52 / 571 Baghdad First Instance, filed by Mr. Saleh Khadduri against
The Committee for the Liquidation of Property of Jews Deprived of Iraqi Citizenship, requesting the release of the seizure on the house numbered ⟦1/15⟧
in the Al-Sa'adoon neighborhood, registered in his name according to the deed numbered ⟦101⟧ August 1948, with an area of ⟦600⟧ square
meters. Mr. Saleh Khadduri appeared before us and took the legal oath that the aforementioned house is his
sole property, and that he has not sold it or waived it to anyone, and that it is still in his possession and no change has occurred to it
(and he did not register it in the name of anyone, especially his son Anwar). He also requests the release of the seizure on his balance deposited in the Bank of
Baghdad Limited in his personal name, as the aforementioned amount is from his private funds and his son Anwar has no
relation to it. Furthermore, his aforementioned son Anwar did not leave Iraq illegally, but rather left with a passport
official issued by the Directorate of Travel and Nationality in Baghdad and according to an exit visa issued by the aforementioned department
for the purpose of studying in England. Accordingly, we have decided to provide him with this endorsement to submit it to
the esteemed court, hoping that his testimony will be accepted and considered a legal proof for him
in everything related to the aforementioned lawsuit. We repeat, according to this endorsement, it is valid despite the article
on which the Committee for the Liquidation of Property of Jews Deprived of Iraqi Citizenship based its seizure of the house
and the balance mentioned above, as they belong to Mr. Saleh Khadduri personally, and his son (Anwar) mentioned
therein has no right or legal or material relationship.
Chief Rabbi
of the Jewish Community in Baghdad
Written in Baghdad on
Presidency of the Jewish Community
in Baghdad
⟦Presidency of the Jewish Community in Baghdad⟧
Page 129
Bullet Points
42
When carefully considering the decision of the Directorate of General Education, one must take into account what its
impact will be, in the present and the future, on the following points and matters -
First - The teacher whom you ordered to be dismissed from the school
Second - The school administration, or more accurately, the administration of the community's schools in the future
Third - The students whom you ordered to be expelled from the school
Fourth - The reputation of the Shamash School
And here we elaborate briefly on each of these points below
First - The teacher whom the Directorate of General Education ordered to be expelled from the school was not given
sufficient opportunity at the outset to defend himself and present whatever evidence and arguments he might have
to refute the accusation directed against him and subsequently to demonstrate his innocence. The rule stating that the
accused must be given ample opportunity to defend himself before concluding that he is a criminal has today become accepted to a degree
that does not require evidence and proofs to reinforce it, and it is applied in all cases and circumstances without exception
in times of peace and war, and in the latter case even to ⟦members⟧ of the army. The Baghdad Penal Code
requires, in addition to giving the accused ample opportunity to defend himself, bringing him in person
for trial and conducting his trial in his presence, just as the State Employees Discipline Law does not support
the dismissal of an employee for committing a crime without giving him ample opportunity to defend himself. It
is not clear why this fundamental rule was not followed regarding the aforementioned teacher, and why he was not brought and
questioned, and why the allegations against him were not investigated before a person, a body of persons, or a committee to look into
the accusation directed against him, determine its validity, and assess its importance. The dismissal of an employee under these circumstances
- as far as the procedures followed regarding him when doing so are concerned - is not consistent with fairness and justice
nor with the provisions of the laws.
It remains for us to consider whether there was strong evidence having the status of conclusive presumption, i.e.,
an indication reaching the level of certainty, supporting the accusation directed against the aforementioned employee, which made
the Directorate of General Education feel that there was no practical benefit in giving the employee the opportunity
to defend himself and justifying the use of this irregular method against him. If we examine this aspect, we
do not find written evidence supporting the accusation directed against him, nor personal evidence, i.e., witness testimonies
regarding specific acts or statements issued by him, and we did not find that he was notorious for bad conduct or behavior, nor was he
known among the people as a troublemaker or as an instigator to commit undesirable matters. The
Directorate of General Education decided to dismiss the aforementioned teacher based on what it believed of him regarding
a malicious spirit against Iraqi unity, etc. -- however, it did not appear how it reached the complete
conviction in these matters, and what are the material issues and factual points it reviewed in this
Page 130
the door, which was decisively supported by the malice of the aforementioned employee and his incitement of strife and corruption
among the students. Is the mere attainment of complete conviction by the Education Inspector regarding the teacher's malice
sufficient for the General Directorate of Education to also reach a complete belief in this regard, or must there be
evidence and proofs to rely upon after discussion and scrutiny when deciding on the man's malice and ill intent by
the higher government centers? "Indoctrinations and the incitement of strife and corruption" were not among the
hidden and internal matters, but rather they are among the factual ⟦and apparent⟧ and apparent matters, and they can, rather should, be proven
with reasonable evidence and proofs, and not be decided upon by mere doubt and suspicion. The Education Inspector states that
he witnessed what supports this poisoned spirit in the teacher's lessons, etc. It is inferred from this that
the aforementioned inspector did not actually witness factual matters and material issues that can be discussed and
then relied upon in faulting the teacher, and that he bases these conclusions on doubt, suspicion,
and conjecture, nothing else. The greatest evidence - and perhaps the only one - supporting the existence of the poisoned spirit in
the school in the view of the Education Inspector is the unsatisfactory answers uttered by four students whose ages do not exceed
eleven years from a class numbering about seventy students when they were questioned during
his visit to the school. Furthermore, the greatest ⟦evidence⟧ of the teacher's responsibility for the existence of this alleged spirit in the view of
the aforementioned inspector is that the subject of these answers is closer to the subject taught by this
teacher than any subject taught by anyone else. The inspector did not question the students during
the teaching time of the aforementioned teacher, nor did he question the latter himself about the answers he received from them, nor
did he investigate the reasons leading to these answers, as it appears, and there is nothing to indicate
that he had conducted thorough investigations into the matter, whether with the school's students or with
the teachers or the acting principal.
The summary of the case is that the Education Inspector had received unsatisfactory answers from a
tiny minority of students in one of the school's classes, so he attributed the existence of the poisoned spirit to all of them
as a result of that, and held the teacher who teaches the subject that is closer, according to his claim, to the subject of the answers
than others, responsible for the existence of this poisoned spirit, and at the same time made him a carrier of a
malicious spirit against Iraqi unity and a performer of indoctrinations and incitement of corruption and strife among the school's students, etc.
These evidences - regardless of the fact that they were not discussed and their worth was not distinguished from their worthlessness - are
insufficient to declare the guilt of the aforementioned employee; rather, they are insufficient to direct a charge against him in a
preliminary manner, and the teacher would be excused and justified in his grievances if these evidences alone are taken
as a reason for his dismissal from his job and the cutting off of his livelihood without any trial or discussion. Furthermore,
the Community Council bears a great moral and literary responsibility when dismissing him under these circumstances.
Page 131
3
42
Second - The most important thing an employee requires - and this expression includes all teachers of the community -
is his retention in his position and his stability in it as long as it is available and he is ready to work and has not committed what
necessitates depriving him of it. The dismissal of the aforementioned teacher in this manner and for these reasons
instills doubt in the hearts of all employees of the community's schools, destroys their hopes, frustrates their activity, and breaks
their morale in a way that brings severe damage to all the community's schools and affects their progress and
their level. If the community teacher begins to believe that he is liable to be deprived of his job in a
sudden manner and merely on suspicion and doubt, and without being given the opportunity to defend himself and without
even being informed of the type of accusation directed against him and the evidence based on it, we do not exaggerate if we say that
the community will not be able, after a short period, to obtain teachers possessing experience
and other qualities necessary for running its schools.
Third - The purpose of the General Directorate of Education's request to expel students who
gave unsatisfactory answers is not clearly apparent, nor is the expected benefit to be gained from such measures. Inflicting
punishment on a criminal, according to the views of those well-versed in the matter, is either for the sake of revenge and maltreatment,
or for the sake of reforming his condition and correcting his conduct, or for the sake of the punished criminal being an example to others.
There is no dispute that the General Directorate of Education is far from aiming for the first part,
just as we do not find any reform in the student's condition when he is expelled from school and deprived of the light of knowledge.
It may be a venture in speech, but it is a bitter truth: that depriving a student who is about
ten years old of study and knowledge may be the greatest misfortune that befalls him throughout
his life, and it is a type of death, and it may sometimes be more impactful than death, as the
student later becomes, as a result of that, a burden on himself and others, and one of the perpetrators of crime and residents of
prisons. As for being an example to others, we do not deny the possibility of its occurrence, but it may be contrary
to what the Directorate of Education imagines, and perhaps its impact would be very bad on the conduct of the rest of the school's students.
If a young student speaks with simplicity, honesty, and naivety in a natural way before the Inspector of
Education and is punished with this severe punishment, then this is a lesson to the rest of the students that they must stay away
from frankness in speech and honesty in tone and resort to ambiguity, secrecy, deception, and cunning. And
it may not be unlikely that the Inspector of Education will see silent mouths or hear false statements when he visits
the school for the second time.
Fourth - If the Inspector of Education received some unsatisfactory answers from a tiny minority of students in
one of the school's classes, why is that ⟦attributed⟧ to one of its teachers definitively and without condition, and what is
the reason for attaching this stigma to the school itself and searching for the malicious spirit and poisoned ideas
prevailing in it, etc.? And why did the inspector not do the opposite and attribute the views of the overwhelming majority of students
to the instruction of the aforementioned teacher, and why did you not imagine that the fathers or guardians of these youths are
Page 132
4
⟦42⟧
Those responsible for the ideas they have in a town like this, where everyone talks about public
matters, and political affairs are almost the subject of conversation in most cafes, entertainment venues, forums,
and social gatherings. Is it then unlikely that we see some youths also talking about these matters
without being informed of their reality or understanding their purposes? If we reflect deeply on the case and take
all its circumstances into consideration, it is not unlikely that this final reason is the only solution
to this case.
Page 133
Secret
His Excellency the President of the Lay Council, Respected
Greetings and respect,
We received your letter No. 2830 dated February 27, 935, and we began the investigation in the first session
which we held at the community administration on the afternoon of Friday 8/3/935. The investigation can be summarized as
follows: -
A- The case papers were read in the first session, consisting of seven items as follows: -
1- A copy of the letter from the Baghdad Education Directorate No. 3/64 dated 12/2/935 to the Directorate
of Shamash School requesting the dismissal of the teacher under investigation, Naeem Effendi Ezra (for his interference in matters that do not concern him),
the expulsion of three students, and notifying all students of the necessity to avoid interfering in matters that do not concern them and which may
cause great harm to the school.
Note - The committee restricted its research to the case of the teacher Naeem Effendi Ezra only, because
the request of the esteemed Council is limited to this case.
2- The response of the Shamash School administration No. 83 dated 14/2/935 to the Education Directorate
includes the following points:
A- Referring the matter of the teacher requested for dismissal to the authority, which is the Lay Council.
B- Implementing the order regarding the expulsion of the three students.
C- Giving the required instructions to the students.
3- A copy of the letter from the Baghdad Education Directorate No. S 15/ dated 16/2/935 in which
the Director of Education orders the dismissal of the teacher Naeem Ezra from teaching immediately without the need to wait for the decision of the Lay Council
to dismiss him.
4- A copy of the letter from the Baghdad Education Directorate No. 3/46/19 dated 17/2/935 mentioning
therein that he learned from the inspector that the dismissal of the teacher Naeem Ezra has not yet been completed, and also orders the necessity of his dismissal from teaching
immediately and the official announcement of the expulsion of the three students.
5- The Lay Council's letter No. 2809 dated February 19, 935, to the teacher Naeem
Effendi regarding the necessity of staying away from the school until further notice.
6- The Lay Council's letter No. 2808 dated February 19, 935, addressed to the Education
Directorate, mentioning how this committee was formed to investigate the case and requesting the reasons that prompted the
Education [Directorate] to request the dismissal of the aforementioned teacher.
7- Then the response of the Baghdad Education Directorate No. 3/64 S 20/ dated 21/2/935 which
explains the justifying reasons, and they can be divided into two parts.
A- That the General Directorate of Education has decided to dismiss the teacher Naeem Effendi Ezra from his teaching profession
based on what it believed of him regarding a malicious spirit against Iraqi unity through his indoctrinations and incitement.
Page 134
( 2 )
sedition and corruption among the students, or that his meetings with them and his teaching of them, and this was confirmed by the visit
of the inspector to the school, as he witnessed in the teacher's teaching what supports this poisonous spirit, and the greatest evidence
of that is what some students stated in front of their colleagues to the inspector when he asked them about Iraq, saying to him
(We do not love Iraq because our homeland is Palestine). Since the aforementioned teacher teaches history and geography,
there is no doubt that the students have been indoctrinated by him with these teachings that are harmful to Iraqi unity.
B - The firm conviction obtained by the inspector that the teacher was one of the biggest instigators
of the students to stir up sedition and agitation inside the school when the government decided to deport the school principal
and his brother outside of Iraq.
As for the first point, since the Directorate of Education did not mention how this belief was generated in it regarding the existence
of a malicious spirit in the teacher against Iraqi unity, the committee relied on what it mentioned of the students' answers
referred to in the book and the fact that the teacher teaches history and geography as the only two pieces of evidence that the aforementioned Directorate
has for that. To investigate them, the committee summoned the teacher and directed some questions to him concerning
the subject, then adjourned the session until Tuesday 12/3/935 to hear the statements of the teachers and students in the school
itself.
B - The committee met at 3:30 in the afternoon of Tuesday 12/3/35 in the school building and summoned
for investigation each of Muayyad Effendi Meir, the assistant principal, Sabri Effendi al-Dhuwaibi, the drawing teacher, and the teacher Yaqub
Effendi, who was present in the class during the inspector's visit to the fourth grade, then it visited the class itself, which
contained approximately seventy students, and directed some questions to the students. What the committee concluded can be limited
as a result of taking statements from the mentioned persons in the following points:
1 - That the inspector visited the fourth grade during the third lesson on Wednesday ⟦6 March 35⟧ in the presence of the teacher
Yaqub Effendi teaching, and directed his question to every student in the mentioned class.
2 - That all students (except four) answered that they love Iraq.
3 - That the student Salman Haskel al-Ani, aged 10 years, answered that he
loves Iran, and when the committee asked him about the reason that prompts him to do so, he said that he had visited Tehran for one week
and he means in his answer that he is impressed by it.
4 - That the student Musa Shamil Haskel answered that he loves Egypt, and since he was not present, the
committee was not able to know the reason.
5 - That the student Haskel Shaul Meshaal, aged 10 years, answered that he loves Palestine,
and to the committee's question, he answered because his uncle resides there.
6 - That the student Ephraim Menashi Ishaq, aged 11 years, answered that he loves Palestine, and to
the committee's question, he answered because his brother resides there.
C - The summary of the committee's opinion on the first charge is as follows:
1 - There is no doubt that the teacher in the primary grades can indoctrinate the students with information that
Page 135
( 3 )
he wants it during his meetings with them and his teaching of them. It is reasonable to attribute the information agreed upon
by the majority of the students to the teacher's indoctrination. As for the answers of a small number, less than 3 percent
of their total, they cannot be attributed to the teacher's work. It appeared to the committee that there are family and private reasons
that prompted the mentioned students to these answers. There is no doubt that children like these, their answers can be attributed
to temporary motives and impressions in their minds.
2- As for the fact that the mentioned teacher teaches history and geography, this was not, in the view of
the committee, a justified reason to hold him responsible for such indoctrinations, assuming they existed in the school, as we
did not find anything to support that the mentioned teacher himself, and no one else, could be the cause for spreading such
indoctrinations.
3- It was reasonable to attribute these indoctrinations - assuming they existed - to the former school
principal and his brother, who, although the reason for their deportation from Iraq remains unknown to the committee,
it is understood from what the local newspapers wrote that their deportation took place for reasons similar to these.
4- As for the firm conviction held by the inspector that the mentioned teacher was
one of the biggest instigators of the students to stir up sedition and agitation inside the school when the government decided to deport
the school principal and his brother outside Iraq, the committee, although it did not find in the letter of the Directorate of Education
any reference to the fixed information on which the inspector built this firm conviction, which made its task
more difficult than it is in itself. It decided to interrogate the teacher Sabri Effendi Al-Dhuwaibi, and upon
his attendance and interrogation, he swore that he had absolutely no doubt about the existence of any relationship between the students' agitation and the teacher Naeem
Effendi Ezra, and that he does not hold any suspicion against the mentioned teacher. He supported his words with the following evidence:
A- The agitation occurred among the secondary class students, while the teacher Naeem Effendi
is a teacher in the primary section only.
B- The secondary class students actually hate the mentioned teacher.
C- The teacher's position in the school negates the possibility of any influence he might have on
the mentioned students.
All of this was supported by the assistant school principal Muayyad Effendi Mayer and the other teachers.
5- Accordingly, the committee sees the necessity of reinstating the mentioned teacher to his position due to the lack of proof of any
charge against him.
Respectfully yours,
⟦signature⟧
Abdul Razzaq ⟦...⟧
⟦signature⟧
⟦signature⟧
7 / March / 935
Page 136
Administration of the Lay Council ועד הגשמי * Baghdad JEWISH LAY COUNCIL
of the Israelite Community BAGHDAD
Baghdad Telephone No. 531
Telephone Number 531
No.:
Number: 2826
Date:
Date: 28 March 935
Subject:
Summary of the Subject:
Baghdad Education Directorate
Reference to your letter No. 64/3 S/20 dated 21 / 2 / 935
Our council had formed a disciplinary committee to investigate the case consisting of the gentlemen Ibrahim Hayyim
Effendi Moallem Nassim, Deputy of Baghdad, the merchant Ezra Effendi Al-Ani, member of the Chamber of Commerce, and the lawyer Abboudi
Effendi Sahay, member of the Municipal Council, and we have received from it the report, a copy of which you will find enclosed.
Our council, based on the reasons stated in the report and based on the fact that the dismissal of employees and the taking of
any disciplinary measure against them is exclusively within its functions according to the law, has decided in its session held
on 24 / 3 / 935 to reinstate the teacher Naeem Effendi Ezra to his position in the Shamash School. And it
is necessary to note here that the General Directorate of Education, which ordered his dismissal from the school, did not give him
sufficient opportunity - in the first instance - to defend himself and state what evidence and
arguments he might have to refute the charge against him and then to show his innocence, even though the rule stating the necessity of
giving the accused ample opportunity to defend himself before concluding he is a criminal has today become accepted
to a degree that needs no proof. The Baghdad Penal Code requires, in addition to giving the accused
ample opportunity to defend himself, bringing him in person for trial and conducting his trial in his presence,
just as the State Employees Disciplinary Law does not support the dismissal of an employee for committing a crime without
giving him ample opportunity to defend himself.
We did not find from the scrutiny of the case any written or personal evidence, i.e., witness testimonies, regarding
specific actions and words issued by the mentioned teacher, and we did not find that he is known for bad conduct and behavior, nor
was he known among the people as an instigator to commit what was undesirable matters for the Education Directorate to take
from all that strong evidence for it ⟦inevitable⟧ conclusive presumption supporting the charge against him, so it does not see any
practical benefit from giving the employee the opportunity to defend himself, which justifies this abnormal method that was followed
against him.
However, the mere attainment of complete conviction by the inspector of the teacher's betrayal is not sufficient in the view of the Council
for the General Directorate of Education to also attain complete belief in the man's betrayal and bad intentions because the indoctrination
and inciting of sedition and corruption were not secret or internal matters and can, rather should, be proven by evidence
Page 137
Administration of the Lay Council
of the Jewish Community
Baghdad
Telephone No. 531
Lay Council * Baghdad
JEWISH LAY COUNCIL
BAGHDAD
Telephone No. 531
No.:
Date: ⟦line⟧ 2 ⟦line⟧
Subject Summary:
No.:
Date:
Subject:
and acceptable evidence.
The summary of the case is that the Inspector of Education had received unsatisfactory answers from a tiny
minority of students in one of the classes, so he attributed the existence of a poisoned spirit to all of them and held the teacher
who teaches the subject that is closest — according to his claim — to the subject of the answers more than others
responsible for this spirit whose existence he imagined.
If the Inspector of Education received some unsatisfactory answers from a tiny minority of the students
of one of the classes, why does he attribute that to one of its teachers by a judgment without restriction or condition, and what is the reason
for attaching this stigma to the school itself? Why did the inspector not do the opposite and attribute the opinions of the
overwhelming majority of students to the instruction of the aforementioned teacher? Why do we not imagine that the fathers or guardians of these
young students, who have not yet passed their first decade, are the ones responsible for the ideas
they have in a town like this, where everyone talks about public matters and political affairs are almost
the subject of conversation in most cafes, entertainment venues, and gatherings? Is it unlikely that we see some
youths talking about these matters without being aware of their reality or understanding their purpose?
The Community Council in this case, besides bearing a great moral and conscientious responsibility
when dismissing the teacher under these circumstances, is compelled, in its capacity as responsible for the administrations of the community's institutions and other
schools which contain a great number of employees, to pay attention to another aspect that has its importance
in this matter.
The most important thing an employee requires — and this expression includes all the community's teachers and employees — is his remaining
in his position and his stability in it as long as it is available and he is ready to work, unless he commits what necessitates depriving him of it.
The dismissal of the aforementioned teacher in this manner and for these reasons instills doubt in the hearts of all employees of
the community's schools and institutions, destroys their hopes, and thwarts their activity in a way that brings severe damage to
the administration and affects the progress of the schools and their standard.
⟦illegible signature⟧
The President
A copy of it for information
To the Directorate of General Education
Page 138
Directorate of Education of Baghdad Province
Number / ⟦illegible⟧ Subject .
Date 23 Dhu al-Hijjah 1353
Corresponding to 28 March 1935 .
Very Urgent
⟦line⟧
To the Directorate of Shamash School
Baghdad
We confirm our previous letters regarding the decision of this department
on the necessity of preventing the attendance of the teacher Naeem Ezra in your school until we communicate with
the Directorate of General Education in this regard .
⟦signature⟧
Acting Director of Baghdad Education
A copy of it to :-
Directorate of General Education .
Administration of the Lay Council
of the Israelite Community in Baghdad .
In reference to your letter -1 No. 2846 dated
28 March 1935 .
Administration of the Lay Council - Baghdad:
Number: 2727
Date: 21 / 4 / 35
File Number:
A/
Page 139
Administration of the Lay Council
of the Jewish Community
Baghdad
Telephone No. 531
Lay Council * Baghdad
JEWISH LAY COUNCIL
BAGHDAD
Telephone No. 531
No. / No.: 2851
Date / Date: 27 Dhu al-Hijjah 1353 / 1 April 1935
Subject / Summary of the Subject:
His Excellency the Director General of Education, Respected
We have received a copy of the letter from the Extraordinary Baghdad Education Directorate dated 23 Dhu al-Hijjah 1353
and 28 March 1935
This Council has decided, after thorough scrutiny fulfilling all its legal and logical conditions, to reinstate
the teacher Naeem Effendi Ezra to his position as there is no justification for handling his case in any other way. This
decision must be implemented unless there are reasons to reopen the investigation anew which we have not been informed of until now.
Due to the impossibility of delaying the mentioned employee's attendance for a long period, we have suspended the implementation of the Council's decision
extraordinarily for one week from this date so that the Baghdad Education Directorate can provide new reasons
for scrutiny if there are any such matters.
We would like to inform Your Excellency that the principals of the schools linked to the administration of the Jewish Community
have the right of general administration and supervision inside their schools only, and they are employees of the Community and do not have
authority regarding the schools' budget or their employees, and communicating with the principals in such matters
results in nothing but confusion; therefore, we suggest limiting communication on the mentioned subjects to this Council or
the Presidency of the Community.
⟦illegible⟧
The President
Page 141
Iraq
Ministry of Education
Personnel Affairs Division
Number: 4718
Date: 27 Muharram 354
1 May 35
Subject ⟦line⟧
To the Presidency of the Lay Council
This department has reviewed your letter dated March 28, 35, numbered 2846
and found that the Council did not view the case with the spirit that motivated this department
to take the measures it took, which is to remove everything that calls for doubt
and brings suspicion to private schools.
This department believes that the first duty incumbent upon it and upon all
private institutions that assist it in the task of spreading culture is to work on spreading the spirit of
unity and the attachment of the youth to their country, and to strike down anyone whose soul suggests otherwise
within educational institutes, whether that is proven against the person or known about them,
as conviction and bad reputation in such matters are sufficient in the view of this department to exclude
unfit teachers. This department regretted finding that the Council's letter,
with the tone it carries, did not attempt to understand this spirit. It also
regretted that the trial committee did not seek the opinion of the inspector, but rather heard the defense
and did not hear the prosecution.
After all this, this department wishes to assure the Council of its good intentions
towards private schools, as it cares deeply and will remain interested in everything that brings
abundant good to these schools, especially regarding the national unity project, just as
it does not allow the teacher's return to the Shamash school at all, given his creation of the problem in
that school. Out of kindness, it agrees to his transfer to another school.
Please accept our highest regards with respect.
Director General of Education
A copy to:
Directorate of Education of Baghdad Province
Administration of the Lay Council - Baghdad
Number 2725
Date 5 / 5 / 35
File Number 44
A. Q.
Page 142
9 Safar 1354 and 12 May 935
To
Directorate of General Education
Reference to your letter No. 4718 dated 3 May 935
You attribute to this Council a lack of spirit toward public interests from
the perspective under discussion. The Council knows of itself - as the government as a whole
knows of the Council and the community it represents - that they are committed to observing public interests
with a spirit of patriotism and unity. Accordingly, our Council confirms that the regret expressed by your
esteemed department in this regard is misplaced.
As for your objection regarding not taking the inspector's statement, this Council had requested
in its letter dated 19 February 935 to the Baghdad Education Directorate to provide it with all the reasons
for the teacher's accusation. It replied with its letter dated 21 / 2 / 935 containing the substance of the
inspector's report. After sending the committee's decision to you, we also asked whether there were other reasons
requiring a reconsideration of the matter; if the inspector had reasons not mentioned in the Education Directorate's
letter, they could have been stated or the inspector could have been sent to state them.
As for your directorate absolutely not permitting the teacher's return to Shamash School, our Council
does not wish now to delve into a discussion of this subject after what was understood from Your Excellency in
one of the oral interviews that you will refer the matter of determining the status of the community's schools
to a specialized committee;
The President
Page 143
562 link 61 in 7 and 356 in 9
Perhaps
Department of Auxiliary Knowledge
562 link 6 in liter 8173 in Majesty perhaps in such
A copy of what was recommended and the committee examined it in truth and handed it over that and regarding this
The reason it must be examined is that either a distance of the same and handed over that I withdraw it as a case of what concerns us
What was recommended has not been clarified to us - for its invalidity and this may be what surrounds it if it remains
Documents from a previous date, the delivery was without an amount. The case has allowed what happens
On any capacity that the director's establishment has been scrutinized.
By the conduct of a sect that he does not hand it over, that they do not work with money that is of no benefit, and from it and with it he ends them not
Because of it, and he becomes an assistant by going out to him, he has reached perhaps 562 for 21 in them, which is a liter
Previously with a telegram number included 562 / 6 / 16 in them for the liter of your blessing to him. And when she was born
And they are third doors, not for me for this, so that we may become familiar and live, what any and the hour has sought. And his half
A section of instead of a liter, perhaps a health of what is requested for work in a place where there is no relief, and in them perhaps we reached a scent of scarcity
For the secret of a generation to work and the hour p the and if it were not us, we have in what
For his receipt of a liter for a bit, he has reached perhaps and when it may happen to his fewness where he is not famous for it, what
And with a share and this goodness from the gift of our profit is spent and in them that he is a fighter of my Lord by passing that as if other than no
A masterpiece for the patient that he has granted a wife, so he knows and this is his division for the deceptions of all the meeting and I went
A section of his death, a section of them, perhaps
And her name
Page 146
2880
15 May 935
Directorate of Shamash School
Reference to your letter No. 20 dated 14 May 935
We approve the return of the two students: Salim Eliyahu Dangour and Edward Shohet to your school;
⟦illegible⟧
⟦illegible⟧
The President
⟦illegible⟧ Baghdad ⟦illegible⟧
⟦illegible⟧ The President ⟦illegible⟧
Page 147
Baghdad 16 / 5 / 1945
His Excellency the President of the Lay Council, the Respected
Greetings and respect.
Furthermore, in view of the issuance of the decision by the Directorate of Education of the Baghdad Province to reinstate my two colleagues
Edward Shohet and Salim Zabkour to their school, and since the accusation for which I was expelled
is the very same accusation for which the others were expelled, I therefore request you to kindly issue your generous order
to reinstate me to my school, from which I have been deprived for a period exceeding three months
Thanking your grace, my lord, and may you remain so
Eliyahu Yusuf al-Ani
Page 149
A
2879
15 May 941
Secret and Very Urgent
Directorate of Shamash School
We have understood that the teacher Sabri Effendi Al-Dhuwaibi, when he learned of the arrival of two letters from the Directorate of Education
requesting the return of the two students Salim Dangour and Edward Shohet to your school, uttered insulting words against
the community and threatened to close the school and vowed by saying (Either I am in the school or these students).
We have also learned that this is not the first time that the aforementioned teacher has uttered such
insults or threats towards the community or the school; therefore, you must conduct the necessary investigations
urgently and inform us fully about the truth of this news and how it occurred in detail, and about the measures that
you have taken against the aforementioned teacher.
⟦illegible⟧
The President
Page 150
⟦illegible⟧
27 / 8
5 / 9 / 48
The Honorable Governor of Baghdad Province
Presidency of the Jewish Community
At six o'clock last night, a group of soldiers attacked the house of Shaul Rejwan in the Al-Saadoun neighborhood with the intent of
arresting his son Salim. When they did not find him in the house, they began searching the house and broke some boxes and closed drawers.
(Among them ⟦Kasha⟧ radio and they took some of the furniture) which shows there was no intent other than theft and looting under the guise of
making an arrest. Since this is not the first incident and since we have previously informed you about these incidents that occur
in the areas of Al-Saadoun, Al-Karrada, and others by persons wearing military and police uniforms who claim they are tasked
with arresting specific persons, we request that you kindly issue your strict orders to prevent the recurrence of such incidents
in the future and to protect the residents of this area.
Sincerely,
⟦illegible⟧