<i>Is Religious Arbitration Possible in a Secular State? An Assessment of the Beth Din of America's Leadership in Religious Arbitration Practices</i>

Creative Commons License

Celikhasi Y., Temel A.

SIRNAK UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF DIVINITY FACULTY, sa.39, ss.399-428, 2026 (ESCI)

Özet

Arbitration, one of the primary alternative methods to courts for resolving disputes, is a dispute resolution method applied today through state control mechanisms and utilized by many religious communities. However, in a secular state, resorting to arbitration can create a conflict between law and religion for religious individuals who wish to live according to the teachings of their religion. The fundamental reason for this conflict is that the secular state does not consider religious arbitration awards to be of a sufficient level and adequacy to be accepted by the judiciary. However, the literature mentions an institution called the Beth Din of America (BDA), which applies Jewish law (Halakha) and is claimed to have overcome this problem, with its arbitral decisions based on religious principles being recognized by the courts. This research examines the scope and boundaries of religious arbitration in secular states, with a focus on the US-based Beth Din through case analysis and literature review. The first part of the study examines the nature of religious arbitration and its relationship with the secular legal system in the United States, where the BDA was established. This is followed by a brief history of the BDA; the institution's religious arbitration practices and their general legal characteristics are examined. In the final section, the study discusses whether the BDA can serve as a pioneer in arbitration for religious groups other than Jews-particularly Muslims-in the United States and other secular countries, and the necessity of such a role. In this context, the question "What are the possibilities and conditions for implementing religious arbitration within a secular system and for its legal recognition?" is explored specifically in relation to the BDA. In conclusion, the experience of the BDA is considered an exemplary model for religious communities in secular states, enabling them to use religious arbitration mechanisms while minimizing conflicts with domestic law. This model offers a dual benefit: it facilitates the representation of religious identities and cultures within the public sphere while simultaneously reducing potential legal tensions between the state and its citizens. It is suggested that this model could be adapted to other contexts, provided that the unique legal frameworks of different countries are taken into consideration.