When Channel 2 split into two channels, "Keshet" aired a new reality show, called "Wedding at first sight", which on the face of it was intended to fulfill a romantic ideal, finding a match so complex and precise that one could meet the one and only groom or bride for the first time under the wedding canopy. The screenings and checks performed for each of the spouses by experts in a variety of fields, are designed to allow maximum and optimal screening of the participants, to the point of finding a match close to perfection, even if the parties themselves have never met.
Adv. Yonathan Kanir || 11.3.18
The legal support I provided for the production of the program began about a year before it went on the air. The legal support was complex and required careful and shrewd handling, in order to avoid any concern of harm to the participants, and in particular – to their future.
In this article, I shall describe the essential steps which I had to take in order for the program to be aired to the Israeli viewer, as well as a forward-looking view of the possible and groundbreaking implications of the program for the Israeli public.
Preliminary stage – The original format
The reality show "Wedding at First Sight" is originally from Denmark, from where it expanded to many countries in Europe, USA, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. – In most of the original countries in which the show was aired, the marriage ceremony between the two parties who first met under the wedding canopy was a real wedding ceremony, that is, at the end of the wedding ceremony the couple participating in it changed their status from two single people to a married couple according to local law.
Within the framework of the format, after the ceremony the couple goes on a "honeymoon" to an exotic destination, then they return to Israel for five weeks of living together, at the end of which they must decide whether to part ways, or whether the pairing has been successful, in which case the relationship continues.
First stage – "Conversion" of the television format
The producer of the program in Israel chose to focus on Israeli, Jewish, heterosexual couples. As we all know, the law that applies to the marriage system in Israel between Jewish heterosexuals is Torah law. In order to adapt the television format to the Israeli (halakhic) legal system, having regard to the complexity arising from the marriage of Jewish couples in Israel, the law which applies to parties in financial matters, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Rabbinical Courts and the halakhic implications deriving from the need to divorce in accordance with Jewish law [1], "wedding" ceremonies that create an obligation or required a bill of divorce within the framework of the Israeli version of the program – from a wedding conducted in accordance with Jewish law, through a civil wedding in Cyprus [2] and a Reform wedding, and ending with a private marriage ceremony [3] – were serially invalidated. The need to combine the requirements of the television format – the holding of an exciting and authentic ceremony – with the obligation to prevent a change in the status of each of the parties participating in the program (single, married, divorced), in such a way as to ensure that the fabric of the couple's lives and the legal system applying to them would not be detrimentally affected the day after the cameras were turned off, led to an explicit recommendation that an exciting marriage ceremony should be created which did not contain the elements required for the creation of a betrothal or any halakhic obligation, and so indeed was it done [4].
Second stage – The commitment ceremony
Based on the thought process explained above, one clear path was chosen at the end of the day that was consistent with the Israeli legal system. The ceremony adopted well-known Jewish symbols, which do not establish a halakhic commitment, but only an emotional commitment. Along with the erection of a canopy over the participants' heads, drinking wine and breaking a glass to commemorate the capital Jerusalem, symbols and customs that may give rise to betrothal, including by error or in jest [5], were deleted and omitted. No rings were exchanged at the marriage ceremony, no kosher witnesses were brought, no Jewish marriage contract was given by the woman, the words "You are consecrated to me with this ring according to the law of Moses and Israel" and the "seven blessings" were omitted, and the words "husband and wife" were not used.
It was clarified to the participants that the manner in which the commitment ceremony was conducted was intended to ensure that no claim would be heard that a divorce or divorce by doubt was required or that there had been a breach of betrothal and that the ceremony created a liability under civil or Jewish law.
In one of the ceremonies that was broadcast, the ceremony organizer read to the guests the following passage: "Welcome to an unprecedented moment." This was not a spontaneous statement but a careful choice of words, adapted to both the couple attending the ceremony and the care required to prevent a possible betrothal and marriage. The officiator then asked the parties:
"Do you take it upon yourself to build your home together with mutual openness, candor, consideration, genuine friendship and shared destiny, to be enriched from your differences and enjoy what you share in common, to be willing to learn, discover and to be surprised each day anew?"
The commitment ceremony, which is seen by the public for all intents and purposes as a wedding ceremony, was devised as a ceremony that establishes a point of connection and commitment between the two parties to the procedures which they must undergo during the program, with a real expectation and intention of creating a future spousal commitment between them, as they declare a genuine and serious intention of building a long-term relationship – without betrothal, without marriage and without any intention to share property.
My goal was to ensure that in this television adventure, no woman would find herself as a "chained" wife and no man would find himself liable to pay spousal maintenance under Jewish law. But what about the promise that the fabric of the parties' lives would not be harmed the day after the show? How could the principle of proprietary separation between the two parties, who until a few minutes ago they did not know one other, be maintained?
Third stage – Mechanisms to ensure the separation of property between the parties
In the absence of a common household and given the short period of time during which the parties are expected to live together under one roof by virtue of the television format, it is highly doubtful whether according to case law the parties would be recognized as a common law couple [6]. At the same time, in order to avoid a situation where one party could make an economic demand of some kind against the other, I was required to devise a mechanism that provides an answer and contends with any relationship termination scenario. The mechanism included a complete separation of rights in the event of a breakup and severance of rights in the event, heaven forbid, of death.
A deep thought process was involved, which centered on the desire to assist two parties meeting for the first time under the canopy, who did not sit together in order to formulate and who could not appear before a notary or competent court in order to certify a financial agreement and avoid any liability towards one anther The agreement which the parties were required to sign requires absolute separation of all types of property, including mutual declarations in relation to waiver of future earnings, claims for career assets, claims regarding sharing of accumulations and social-welfare rights and finally a waiver of spousal maintenance, whether they should decide to carry on their spousal relationship even after the end of the program or not – and all from the date on which the relationship was established, until the date on which a new independent agreement shall be formulated.
It is important to point out, that under the prevailing law an agreement made between common law spouses is valid even without the court's endorsement [7], and therefore despite the fact that the parties signed absolute separation of property agreements, without any residue, the participants were advised to also make a will.
On a more personal note – Looking ahead
Contemplating the idea and format of the show "Wedding at First Sight" objectively, it is clear to me that it is easy to categorize it as another "reality" show, that squeezes one emotion or another, and to leave it on the shallow side of Israeli discourse. In my opinion, such a view is narrow and limited, since in practice we are experiencing for the first time a groundbreaking platform in the Israeli-Jewish space, broadcast during peak viewing hours, with an extremely significant audience [8], and which, beyond being a spicy and intriguing reality show, genuinely challenges the status quo in Israeli society regarding the marriage of Jewish couples, as well as, in particular, the Rabbinical Courts' monopoly in all matters pertaining to marriage and divorce in Israel.
The show's participants and the audience, responsibly receive for the first time an opportunity to become acquainted with and experience a non-religious, commitment ceremony, without betrothal, which does not create obligations under Jewish law, and at the same time guarantees the economic rights of each party.
There is no disputing that various forms of marriage have existed outside the framework of the Rabbinate for decades, however, the good news in our case is the legitimacy to perform a commitment ceremony without the need to go through the Rabbinical Court, while determining clear and simple arrangements before the parties come to the commitment ceremony, which is broadcast during the Israeli audience's peak viewing hours, is no trivial matter.
Since revolutions sometimes also begin quietly, it seems that the Rabbinical Courts' continued refusal to recognize that Jewish marriages should and can end unilaterally – and without the need for a clear ground for divorce – shall lead to a change in the Israeli public's perception in the coming years, to a decline in the prestige of the institution of marriage as we know it, to a marked increase in the existence of alternative commitment systems which from the couples' perspective provide an identical answer, and the holding of the commitment ceremony while respecting the mutual rights of the parties, including their right to part easily and respectfully and alongside a system or systems of agreements that will provide the couple with economic security and equanimity.
If the Rabbinical Courts are not able to extend the existing methods of ordering divorce to situations where the marriage has broken down, and at the behest of one spouse only, then I anticipate that in future we shall see an increasing number of such arrangements in the public discourse, as an integral part of personal status law.
Couples shall choose the path of a respectful commitment ceremony accompanied by a property agreement drafted in accordance with their wishes, lifestyles and respective economic situations, and of course, one which enables them to easily separate should the spousal relationship collapse.
[1] Dr. B. Schereschewsky Family Law, Fourth Edition.
[2] See the judgment of the Ashkelon Rabbinical Court in Case No. 1004753-1, dated 15.7.15 (published on the Nevo website).
[3] See CA 32/81 Moshe Tzonen v. Silvia Shatal, IsrSC 37 (2) 761, 766
[4] See the article regarding the program on the ICE.CO.IL.WWW website which quotes the Chief Rabbinate's response: "The wedding ceremony presented in the program lacks the basic elements of the wedding ceremony required by law".
[5] See the ruling of the Ashkelon Rabbinical Court in Case 1074259/1, dated 14.12.16 (published on the Nevo website).
[6] See CA 52/80 Shahar v. Friedman IsrSC 38 (1) 433
[7] See LCA 6854 Attorney General v. Michael Zemer (judgment given on 2.7.03, published in the Nevo legal database).
[8] http://www.ice.co.il/media/news/article/660075 Publication of the viewers rating as of November 2017