Regarding the purchase of real estate together, the respondent claims that no original documents were submitted regarding the purchase and the versions regarding the purchase were changed. It was argued that the purchase of a joint real estate property does not necessarily prove a marital relationship, especially when the purpose of the purchase remains unknown.
- In the Discussion Before me on October 22, 2025, the parties reiterated their arguments. The appellant's sister, who appeared at the hearing, spoke about the relationship between the appellants, who have been married for 13 years and cling to each other, sickly and joyfully. According to her, they "do not see each other without each other" and if the appellant is forced to leave Israel, the appellant will have to leave with her, a price that the family is not willing to accept.
At the end of the hearing, the respondent was presented with a proposal by the court, according to which the appellants would present to the authority evidence of external parties that could attest to the sincerity of the relationship, and these would be examined by the authority.
- After examining the proposal, the Respondent announced (on November 25, 2025) that it had decided not to agree to the proposed outline. It was explained that the appellants' case was brought before the respondent's representatives several times beginning in 2013, the appellants were interviewed in depth and their matter was brought before the judicial courts five times. On all those occasions, the representatives of the Authority were unable to get an impression of the sincerity of the marital relationship, and the appellants were unable to lift the burden required of them.
Discussion and Decision
- After carefully examining all the documents presented by the parties and the decisions rendered in the matter of the appellants, and having carefully considered the arguments raised before me, I have come to the conclusion that the appeal should be granted, since the determination regarding the insincerity of the marital relationship in this case exceeds the realm of reasonableness.
- Acquisition of Israeli citizenship for a spouse married to an Israeli citizen is regulated In section 7 to the Citizenship Law, 5712-1952. The provision of the law states that "A husband and his wife, one of whom is an Israeli citizen... The other can obtain citizenship by naturalization, even if he does not meet the conditions in section 5(a)". The purpose of the law is to allow an Israeli citizen to tie his fate to a foreign citizen as he wishes, without this entailing a choice between a spouse and starting a family or living in Israel (Appeal Petition/Administrative Claim 5983/16 Anonymous v. Ministry of the Interior (Granted on May 10, 2018).
The law facilitates the naturalization process of the spouse of an Israeli citizen, but does not grant him automatic citizenship by virtue of marriage, in order to prevent the abuse of naturalization for opportunistic reasons, and this is at the discretion of the Minister of the Interior (HCJ 754/83 Rankin v. Minister of the Interior, IsrSC 38(4) 113; High Court of Justice 4156/01 Dimitrov v. Ministry of the Interior, IsrSC 56(6) 289). The implementation of the law is regulated by the Minister of the Interior's procedure for examining an application for naturalization by virtue of marriage - the "Procedure for Handling the Granting of Status to a Foreign Spouse Married to an Israeli Citizen" (Procedure No. 5.2.2008). The procedure establishes a gradual process of several years, during which the sincerity of the relationship, the center of life in Israel, and the absence of security and criminal impediments are examined. The exam also includes a personal interview regarding the sincerity of the relationship between the spouses.