In 1995, a Palestinian woman from Beita, a village near Nablus, married an Israeli resident from East Jerusalem and moved to live with him in Ras al-‘Amud in the city. The couple lived there, together, until the husband passed away in March 2011. The wife had lived in Israel all those years pursuant to military-issued stay-permits granted as part of the procedure for family unification with her husband. When the husband died, the Ministry of Interior halted the family unification procedure and her stay-permit was not renewed. Her last permit expired three months after her husband died. Only in November 2011, after much effort vis-à-vis the Ministry of Interior and shortly after her matter was transferred to
the Inter-Ministerial Committee for Humanitarian Affairs (which advises the Minister of Interior on applications for stay-permits or status in Israel in special humanitarian cases), was the woman able to have her stay-permits renewed.
As the husband was insured with the National Insurance Institute (NII), the widow filed a claim for survivor’s pension in December 2011. The NII said it would approve the claim only if she produced confirmation that she had remained in Israel legally after her husband’s death. Since the Ministry of Interior delayed granting the widow Israeli stay-permits between July and October of 2011, routine practice by the Ministry of Interior, the widow contacted HaMoked for assistance.
In February 2012, after HaMoked wrote to the NII requesting the widow be paid the full pension to which she is
entitled by law, the NII paid the widow for some of the period following her husband’s death, but refused to pay for the two months regarding which she was unable to present stay-permits. Therefore, in June 2012,
HaMoked filed a claim with the Labor Court, seeking the NII be instructed to pay the outstanding survivor’s pensions. HaMoked argued that the widow should not be denied the pension for the two-month period for which she was unable to present Israeli stay-permits, as she had lived in Israel lawfully for more than 12 years, with the exception of a few months administrative detent, during which she did not have a permit for bureaucratic reasons related to the Ministry of Interior and over which she had no control. HaMoked added that denying the pension because of the absence of permits is absurd as, under the National Insurance Law itself, had the woman left Israel for those two months, she would have been eligible for the pension.
Two months later, the NII notified HaMoked that the survivor’s pension would be paid out to the widow for the entire period following her husband’s death.
With HaMoked’s consent, the Court gave the NII’s notice regarding payment of the outstanding pensions the validity of a judgment. Despite the fact that HaMoked stressed that the NII retracted its refusal because a claim was filed and that without it, the widow would not have received the pension to which she is entitled, the Court decided not to order the NII to pay trial costs.
