Q&A: The Laws of Informing in Our Time
The Laws of Informing in Our Time
Question
Do the laws of informing still apply nowadays? And in what cases?
Answer
It seems to me that the laws of informing definitely do apply nowadays, but of course not according to the infantile Haredi interpretation. If someone is handed over to an unjust, arbitrary, and cruel system, then the law of informing applies. In a proper state with a proper legal system, it does not. Therefore, someone who hands a person over to a Haredi religious court in certain cases may have the status of an informer, but not someone who turns a person in to the police or to the judicial system. Take careful note.
——————————————————————————————
Questioner:
What about reporting someone to the tax authorities? Also, isn’t there a problem in handing a case over to a legal system that is not based on the Torah because of: “And these are the ordinances that you shall set before them” — before them and not before gentiles?
——————————————————————————————
Rabbi:
Reporting someone to the tax authorities is entirely legitimate. What problem could there be with it? On the question of “before them,” see my article for the Orthodox forum that appears on the site.
Discussion on Answer
Thanks for the suggestion. I’m standing in the corner feeling ashamed.
If a resident signs onto an urban renewal / demolition-and-rebuilding project, or a resident appointed as a “residents’ representative” in such a project, and as a result they pressure neighbors who do not want the project (because those neighbors are fine in their home and neither need nor want this whole adventure) to sign under coercion, otherwise they and the developer will sue them in what is called a “refusing resident” lawsuit — are they considered informers according to Jewish law? What does Jewish law say about such a Jew who, in order to improve his own conditions, harms his neighbor’s property, peace of mind, and health?
In my opinion there is no problem here, for two reasons: 1. Because this is the law, and the law of the kingdom is law. 2. Because a person has the right to improve and increase the value of his property, and the other person who prevents this is essentially pursuing him (not literally, of course). Especially since the value of the other person’s property will also improve as a result, so common sense indicates that there is no prohibition against compelling him to do this. One could get into the topics of invasion of privacy damages and the laws between neighbors, but this is not the place.
What is more, here the majority of the neighbors made a public decision, and that has force to compel the minority. Recall that under the law we are talking about a very large majority (67% or even 80%, depending on the circumstances). This is no different from a community decision to build a mikveh or some public institution and levy taxes for it at the expense of the community members’ money.
It seems strange to me that you ask what Jewish law says about a Jew who, in order to improve his own conditions, harms his fellow’s property, peace of mind, and health, when in truth the opposite is the case: the refuser, in order to improve his own life, harms the property and welfare of a large majority of the neighbors just because he doesn’t feel like agreeing. They obviously are not harming his property; they are increasing its value. At most, in order to do so, they are harming his peace of mind. One should remember that the law itself recognizes a resident’s right to refuse under justified circumstances. If he refuses against the law, that means his reasons are not justified and he is simply harming the value of his neighbors’ property.
I have seen an upside-down world!
A sycophantic answer from the Rabbi. I wouldn’t suggest that he issue halakhic rulings. Unfortunately, a significant portion of his rulings are, to put it mildly, not true…. Today’s legal system or police do not qualify as a just system…. Shame on the Rabbi for writing or thinking this way…