In 1950, the Knesset discussed the Age of Marriage Bill. The bill criminalized marriage to a woman under 17, but included a clause that allowed for a social worker to petition to a religious court for the dissolvement of underage marriages. The debate revealed disagreements between the bill`s initiator, MK Ada Maimon of Mapai, and MK Salim Amin Jarjoura of the “Nazareth Democratic Party”, affiliated with Mapai.
MK Jarjoura opposed the ‘social worker’ clause, claiming it was inappropriate for the state to meddle in the internal affairs of the family and in the operation of the religious courts, who enjoyed a semi-autonomous status, a rarity when it came to Arab communal institutions. A heated debate followed between the two MK’s, both claiming to authentically represent ‘the Arab woman’.
The present paper will review some of the questions arising from this debate, concerning the `proper representation` of minorities, and regarding the political power and agency of both MK’s, socialist MK Maimon, and Christian-Arab MK Jarjoura. The basic question that defiantly came up in the debate - who is the authentic representative of the Arab woman, and who merely pretends to represent her, lead to questions of the political freedom and agency given to an Arab representative in the Knesset, when will he choose to oppose the dictated party line, and with whom he can cooperate.