| • Science | • People | • Locations | • Timeline |
Supporters of the Law of Return claim that to understand it requires an understanding of the political context in which it was created in the summer of 1950. Only five years after the end of World War II and the Holocaust, the Jews of Europe had all suffered an incalculable personal loss of family members, friends, communities, and livelihoods.
Jewish emigration to Palestine was not only seen as the fulfillment of a religious cultural vision, but as the only viable option for Jews seeking refuge from anti-Semitic persecution. While other states had denied the mass immigration of Jewish refugees, forceful Zionist advocates in Palestine had become symbolic of both a literal interpretation of the cause for a Jewish homeland and a tangible and immediate means for continued survival.
The Law of Return and the Law on Citizenship were enacted by the Knesset, Israel's Parliament in the summer of 1950 (on the Jewish calendar, 20th Tammuz 5710). These two pieces of legislation contain expressions pertaining to religion, history and nationalism, as well as to democracy, in a combination unique to Israel. They do indeed grant preferential treatment to Jews "returning" to their ancestral homeland.
The purpose of the Law of Return: ... like that of the Zionist Movement, was to provide a solution to the Jewish people's problem - to establish a home for the entire Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael, the Land of Israel. In the Law of Return, the State of Israel put into practice the Zionist Movement's "credo" as pledged in the Declaration of Independence.
The Law of Return was to declare that Israel constituted a home not only for the inhabitants of the State but also for all members of the Jewish people as whoever they may be, those living in countries where they were in distress, as well as in countries of affluence. It was to declare both to the Jewish people and to the world that the State of Israel was in practice opening its gates to the Jews of the world to return to their ancient homeland.
Critics claim that the Law of Return is part of a larger system of institutional apartheid, whereby Jews in Israel are given superior civil and social rights over Arabs. They further claim that the purpose of the Right of Return runs counter to the claims of a democratic state.
Defenders agree that the purpose of the Right of Return is to keep Israel predominantly Jewish, but disagree that the goal of the law is unworthy, and whether the policy is unnecessary. Proponents claim that in a world where Jews have been persecuted, the concept of a maintaining a Jewish state is both legitimate and necessary.
In Israel, the debate has continued to rage over the Law of Return and how to proceed in this regard. Some wish to retain it as it stands, others want to modify it, while yet others point to the contradictions that exist between the preference for Jews and the value of equality, and therefore argue that the time has come to abolish the Law of Return.
Those who wish to see it abolished claim that although the law did indeed contribute to immigration and absorption when Israel was established, it is no longer needed.
Defenders of the Law of Return argue that abolishing it by eliminating the preference accorded to Jews - even if they are citizens of another country - namely, that when they immigrate to Israel they are entitled to receive immediate Israeli citizenship.
Advocates for the Palestinian people cite several international resolutions and mandates supporting their own "Right of Return" to their homes, such as United Nations Resolution 3236 of 1974, which: "Reaffirms also the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property from which they have been displaced and uprooted, and calls for their return"