A foreign spouse who leaves an abusive Israeli partner can keep their status under Procedure 5.2.0019 — proof, both paths, and the humanitarian committee.
One of the hardest situations in the graduated process is that of a foreign spouse living in a violent relationship, who fears that separating will mean losing their residence permit and being required to leave Israel. The Population and Immigration Authority has a dedicated procedure for exactly this situation: Procedure 5.2.0019, "Procedure for Handling the Termination of the Graduated Process for Regularizing the Status of Spouses of Israelis as a Result of Violence by the Israeli Spouse." Its purpose is to prevent a situation in which a person remains in a violent relationship solely to preserve their status. Based on the wording of the Procedure itself, this article explains who is eligible for this track, how the violence claim is proven, and what happens at the end of the process.
The Procedure applies when a relationship under which the graduated process began — through marriage or cohabitation with an Israeli citizen or permanent resident — was severed as a result of violence by the Israeli spouse. The report may come from either spouse or from another party. Once the report is received, the bureau summons both spouses for interviews on separate dates, within 45 days of the report, and the interview is conducted under the Procedure for Conducting Interviews (5.1.0013). Two things are important to know. First, the Procedure expressly states that no decision on the foreign spouse's status may be made without an interview. Second, immediate departure from the country is not required — if necessary, the bureau will extend the existing residence permit until a decision is reached, and the duty to extend also applies during the interim period while the file awaits a decision from the committee or headquarters (clauses ג.7, ג.10 and ג.12 of the Procedure). On the other hand, failing to appear for the interview without a reasonable explanation may lead to the permit being revoked and a demand to leave within 14 days — so the summons must not be ignored.
Proving the violence claim is a threshold condition: the Procedure states that failure to provide proof will result in the application being dismissed outright. No criminal conviction is required — the Procedure (clause ג.8.1.3) recognizes four alternative ways to prove the claim: staying for a month or more in a shelter for women who are victims of violence, together with confirmation that the resident experienced violence from the spouse; prima facie evidence in the possession of the police that a violent offense was committed; a protection order against the Israeli spouse issued by the Family Court after a hearing attended by both parties; or confirmation from the local authority's social services department, or from the center for treating and preventing domestic violence, that the foreign spouse is being treated there because of domestic violence. If no proof is attached, the bureau notifies the applicant that supporting evidence must be provided within 30 days; failing that, the application is dismissed outright and referred for handling under the standard procedure for terminating the graduated process (5.2.0017).
When the spouses have a shared child, the file will be referred to the interministerial committee for discussion if cumulative conditions are met: an application for status based on a sincere and genuine relationship has been filed; the sincerity of the relationship was proven as required under the relevant procedure (5.2.0008, 5.2.0011, or 5.2.0009); the violence claim was proven by one of the methods described above; and the shared child is in the custody of the foreign spouse, or the foreign spouse maintains a close and continuous relationship with the child and provides for the child's maintenance and needs — provided that a professional social worker's opinion determined that the foreign spouse's departure from the country would significantly harm the child. Note an important difference from the standard track under Procedure 5.2.0017: on the violence track with a shared child, the applicant is not required to already hold an A/5 permit, nor is it required that more than half of the process has elapsed.
When there is no shared child, the cumulative conditions resemble the standard track: an application based on a sincere and genuine relationship; receipt of an A/5 temporary residence permit within the graduated process; more than half of the graduated process period having elapsed — counted, for this purpose, from the date of the upgrade to the A/5 permit; no doubt as to the sincerity of the relationship throughout the process; and proof of the violence claim by one of the four methods. Clause ג.8.2 of the Procedure also requires that the claim of violence by the Israeli spouse relate to the period preceding the end of the relationship — meaning that the separation must be a result of the violence, and not a separate event from it.
An important feature of the violence procedure: if the case is found to meet the criteria, the file is transferred, within 60 days of the interview, to the head of the Visas and Status Division at Authority headquarters — who is authorized, under Procedure 5.2.0022 (the interministerial committee procedure), to approve the application directly, without the need for a discussion before the interministerial committee. If not approved this way, the application is referred to the committee, and the existing permit is extended until its decision. Even when the criteria are not fully met but the violence has been proven and there appear to be special humanitarian grounds, the file may be referred for review by headquarters. When the committee recommends approval, it may grant a B/1 work permit for up to two years or an A/5 permit for at least two years, and at the end of that period the case is reviewed again. A refusal must be given in writing and with reasons. Note two different deadlines: the Procedure instructs that the decision must state the possibility of filing an internal appeal to the Authority without delay and no later than 21 days (in accordance with Procedure 1.6.0001), whereas an appeal to the Appeals Tribunal for immigration matters must be filed within 30 days under section 13כד(ב) of the Entry into Israel Law, 5712-1952 — and an extension of time is granted only for special reasons that are recorded.
The Appeals Tribunal insists on the precise wording of the proof requirements. In Appeal (Jerusalem) 3039-22 (4 Jul 2023), the tribunal dismissed the appeal of an appellant who had stayed in a shelter for only two weeks and two days — not a month, as required under clause ג.8.1.3 — and whose order from the Family Court had been issued ex parte, whereas the Procedure requires an order issued after a hearing attended by both parties. The tribunal added that the violence claim was raised only after the graduated process had already been terminated, so no causal link between the violence and the end of the relationship was proven. The practical lesson: comply precisely with the evidentiary requirements, and raise the violence claim in real time, not after the fact.
By contrast, the appellate courts have made clear that the Procedure must not be reduced to a technical checklist. In Adm. Appeal (Tel Aviv) 61837-06-24 (28 Sep 2025), the Authority's decision and the tribunal's judgment were set aside, and the case of the appellant — whose former spouse had been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for violence against her — was remanded to the interministerial committee for a new, full discussion under the violence procedure. The court held that the Authority must consider the application under the correct procedure, base its decision on a complete and reasoned factual foundation, and treat the violence factor as a central and primary consideration; the court also remarked that every decision should ideally state under which procedure it was issued.
The Supreme Court clarified that the violence factor is not confined to the threshold of the formal track. In Leave to Appeal (Supreme Court) 8997/23 Yafet v. Population and Immigration Authority (13 Feb 2024), it was held that even when a file reaches the interministerial committee other than through the violence procedure track, the committee must consider the violence claim and weigh the connection-to-Israel factor against the purpose of protecting victims of violence. Following this, it was held in Leave to Appeal (Supreme Court) 68404-05-25 (30 Dec 2025) that extra caution must be exercised in cases under the violence procedure, and the court noted that once a matter was referred to the committee, the Authority was required to regularize the status during the interim period as well, as required by clauses ג.10 and ג.12 of the Procedure.
At the same time, the tribunal has noted that the Procedure is not a gateway to automatic status. In Appeal (Jerusalem) 4066-25 (29 Apr 2026), it was emphasized that the purpose of the Procedure justifies relaxing the connection-to-Israel test — since a victim of violence sometimes finds it difficult to form independent ties — but also that the committee is authorized to recommend only a temporary stay (B/1 or A/5 for a fixed period), for the purpose of reorganizing and recovering, and not permanent status; in the circumstances of that case, where ties to the country of origin were strong and the appellant did not claim that the violence prevented her from integrating in Israel, the appeal was dismissed.
Document every incident of violence in real time — a police complaint, contact with a welfare hotline, medical treatment; turn to the treatment providers recognized under the Procedure (a shelter, welfare services, a center for preventing violence) — treatment there also serves as evidence; do not disappear from the process, and appear for every interview; and consider early legal representation — the choice between the violence track and the standard humanitarian track, and gathering the right evidence, directly affect the outcome.
No. One of four methods of proof is enough: a month or more in a shelter for victims of violence together with confirmation, prima facie evidence held by the police, a protection order from the Family Court issued after a hearing attended by both parties, or confirmation from a recognized welfare body of treatment for domestic violence.
The criteria-based track without a shared child does require an A/5 permit and more than half of the process to have elapsed. However, the Procedure also allows, in cases that do not meet the criteria, referral for review by Authority headquarters when the violence has been proven and there are special humanitarian grounds. As a rule, even when the file is discussed by the interministerial committee other than through the violence procedure track, the committee must consider the violence claim as part of its considerations. Individual legal advice is strongly recommended.
No. The Procedure expressly states that immediate departure will not be required until a decision is made, and the existing permit will be extended if necessary. But failing to appear for the interview without a reasonable explanation may lead to the permit being revoked and a demand to leave within 14 days.
Depending on the circumstances: direct approval by the head of the Visas and Status Division, or a recommendation from the interministerial committee for a B/1 permit for up to two years or an A/5 permit for at least two years — with the continuation reviewed at the end of that period.
Two tracks must be distinguished. An internal appeal to the Authority itself must be filed without delay and no later than 21 days, as set out in Procedure 1.6.0001, and the Procedure instructs that this be stated in the refusal decision. An appeal to the Appeals Tribunal must be filed within 30 days of notice of the decision, under section 13כד(ב) of the Entry into Israel Law, 5712-1952, and an extension of time is granted only for special reasons. That said, case law has emphasized that extra caution should be exercised regarding requests for extensions in domestic violence cases, and in exceptional circumstances such a request has even been granted. Do not rely on this — act on time.