The Attorney General, Meni Mazuz, stated his opinion last week that same-sex partners should not be discriminated against in all that is related to the payment of survivors benefit. The opinion was expressed in the statement of opinion prepared by the Attorney General for the District Labor Court for Tel-Aviv and Jaffa, in response to the claim against the National Insurance Institute (herein NII) that was submitted by ACRI. The claim was submitted just over a year ago by ACRI’s Chief Legal Counsel, Attorney Dan Yakir, on behalf of Giora Raz, who was denied survivors benefit by the NII after the death of his partner two years ago. It should be noted that the Attorney General’s decision to intervene and voice an opinion on the matter was due to the issue’s public and principled importance.
The Attorney General writes in his statement of opinion, that one cannot justify a situation in which the right to survivors benefit is not recognized for the sole reason that they chose to be involved in a same-sex relationship. This is in spite of the language of the law, in which, the definition of a “widower” applies only to a man that was married to a women”. On this issue Mazuz emphasizes, in light of the contents of The National Insurance Law that is designed to protect widows and widowers from economic want, there is no difference in essence between same sex couples and heterosexual couples, and thus the law must be considered relevant for same-sex partners. They too, he makes clear, are liable to find themselves in a situation of financial need after the death of their partner. “It should be noted”, Mr. Mazuz writes, “that the National Insurance Law is designed to realize the ideal of justice, equality, and mutual aid, and it expresses the concern for all the state’s citizens…..any interpretation therefore, must be judged by the aforementioned in order to fully realize the purpose of the law”. This interpretation of the law of course also applies to a couple comprised of two women who live their life as a couple. The interpretation of the law adopted by the Attorney General is likely to have an impact on all benefits and stipends that are paid to a spouse or common law partners, including work-injury benefits, one-time birthing grants which should be paid to the male partner instead of the new mother, and disability benefit.
Giora Raz and his partner, Ya’acov Lisboder, lived together for a period of 23 years, ran a joint home and maintained a family life in every sense. The deceased partner was the primary financial provider in the family unit they established. In the spring of 2002 Mr. Lisboder was diagnosed with cancer, and he had to undergo a series of treatments, hospitalizations, and complicated operations, which required him to stop working in the EL AL airline company. In light of his difficult physical and emotional state, Raz decided in the autumn of the same year to leave his place of work in order to devote all his time to his sick partner and become the primary caretaker. Since then Raz has received a retirement pension from the National Insurance Institute. About two years ago, after a protracted period in which Lisboder’s condition worsened, he died. Raz is currently unemployed with no income other than his retirement pension, which after cuts is approximately 1,300NIS a month. A few months after the death of his partner, Raz submitted a claim for survivors benefit to the NII, as the widower of the insured party. The NII rejected his claim on the grounds that he does not comply with the definition of a widower contained in the National Insurance Law. The law defines “widower” as “an individual who was the male spouse to a woman who was insured at the time of her death..” and a “widow” as “an individual who was the wife of a man who was insured at the time of his death…” It should be noted that survivor’s benefit is also granted to common law partners, and not only those who were married.
Attorney Yakir states in the text of the claim that the NII’s position, according to which the plaintiff does not fall within the definition of “spouse”, constitutes severe discrimination against the plaintiff and his partner on the grounds of their sexual orientation. “This interpretation”, he writes, “undermines and denigrates the warm and loving relationship that developed between the plaintiff and the deceased, a relationship that lasted for the extended period of 23 years. “Such an interpretation depicts the feelings of love and union as not worthy of recognition, which is combined with a profound sense of humiliation and a severe undermining of his sense of dignity solely because of his inclusion in a particular social group”. Attorney Yakir, further explains that the NII’s decision also discriminates against the sex of the plaintiff and the deceased, as in the event that one member of the couple had been a woman the NII would not have prevented the surviving partner from receiving survivor’s benefit.
last updated : 15/03/05
