Cambridge Law Faculty published this video item, entitled “Can the consent required for a religious divorce be secured by state coercion?: CSLG” – below is their description.
Speaker: William Gelley (University of Cambridge)
This seemingly esoteric question lies at the heart of a rapidly developing area of English law which has received significant media coverage in recent months.
In Orthodox Judaism, a woman must receive a Get (religious divorce) in order to remarry, regardless of whether she has already been granted a civil divorce. The ‘modern Agunah problem’ refers to the women who are ‘chained’ indefinitely due to their husbands’ refusal to grant a Get after the marriage has irretrievably broken down.
Recently, Parliament, the government and the courts have all intervened to devise methods to pressure husbands into granting a divorce. In 2019, the Court of Appeal affirmed the possibility of financial repercussions for Get refusers. Lawyers have attempted private prosecutions to threaten Get refusers with criminal sanctions. Prosecution efforts have been supported by provisions in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 which broaden the scope of the controlling and coercive behaviour offence. Get refusal is explicitly mentioned in the draft statutory guidance to the Act.
The seminar analyses the consequences of state compulsion by reference to sources of Jewish law and the effects of similar developments in the state of New York. It claims that unilateral state action is counterproductive because divorces procured by coercive methods are generally considered to be invalid by the religious courts that supervise them. The result is that external interventions intended to help the victim have the perverse effect of making it more difficult for her to receive a Get in the future. The unilateral approach is contrasted to a proposed collaborative model involving cooperation with Rabbinic authorities, which offers an avenue to achieve the same goal in at least some cases while avoiding the issues engendered by state interference in an inherently religious process.
For reference: “Consent by Coercion—The Limits of External Solutions to the Agunah Problem” [2021] CFLQ 43
For more about the Cambridge Socio-Legal Group see: https://www.law.cam.ac.uk/researchfaculty-centres-networks-and-groups/cambridge-socio-legal-group
Cambridge Law Faculty YouTube Channel
Got a comment? Leave your thoughts in the comments section, below. Please note comments are moderated before publication.
