ITIM has demanded that the Chief Rabbinate guarantee women equal conditions in its upcoming certification exams, warning that it may return to court after the Rabbinate again announced that the tests would be divided between two Jerusalem venues.
The demand comes less than a month before the next exam session, and follows the historic first sitting for women in April, when three female candidates waited approximately four and a half hours after the men began before receiving their exam papers.
In a September 17 letter, ITIM asked the Rabbinate to ensure that women’s exams begin and end on time, are graded anonymously and are held under the same physical conditions as men’s.
It also demanded qualified staff to answer questions during the tests, arrangements to protect candidates from outside disruption, and clear accommodations for pregnant and nursing women, reservists, and reservists’ spouses.
The Rabbinate published the dates for each exam subject on September 16 and said the tests would be held at the Jerusalem International Convention Center and the Religious Services Ministry.
Separating the venues between men and women could equal improper exclusion
It has not been established which candidates will be assigned to each site. ITIM said that, based on the previous session, it expects men to sit the exams at the convention center and women at the ministry.
The organization argued that separating the venues would itself amount to improper exclusion. At a minimum, it said, the Rabbinate must prove that the arrangement will not leave women with inferior conditions.
ITIM first approached the Rabbinate on August 3, seeking advance clarification of the venues, procedures and available accommodations. It sent a reminder on September 3. According to the organization, neither letter received a response.
The latest letter asks for a detailed answer “as soon as possible” but sets no specific deadline. ITIM said it would consider legal action if the Rabbinate did not provide timely assurances.
The dispute is the latest stage of an eight-year fight over women’s access to the state examinations.
Rabbinate does not ordain women
Six female Torah scholars first sought to register in 2018 but were rejected because the Rabbinate does not ordain women. They petitioned the High Court of Justice the following year alongside ITIM, the Rackman Center and Kolech.
In July 2025, the High Court unanimously ruled that women could not be barred from the exams. The justices distinguished between ordination, which was not at issue, and access to a state-administered examination system carrying professional and financial consequences.
The Rabbinate’s certificates can affect eligibility and salary scales for some public-sector positions and, under specified conditions, may be treated as equivalent to an academic degree. The certificates can also increase the salaries of some teachers of religious studies.
That makes the dispute more than symbolic. The state attaches economic value to success in the exams, while the women now entitled to sit them are still seeking assurances that they will receive conditions equal to those provided to men.
The ruling also rejected a proposed alternative examination track for women, finding that a separate system would not provide genuinely equal recognition.
Women were eventually permitted to register in February. But when the first three candidates arrived for an exam on the laws of mourning on April 27, they were sent to the Religious Services Ministry while the men sat the exam at the convention center.
According to ITIM, the women began shortly before 3 p.m. following an urgent approach to the High Court. The organization said no professional staff member was present to answer questions and that they placed their completed booklets in a box marked “women’s classroom,” raising concerns that graders could identify their gender.
“We expect the Chief Rabbinate to come to its senses and ensure fair and equal examination conditions,” said attorney Timna Guttel of ITIM’s legal department.
ITIM founder Rabbi Seth Farber said the uncertainty was particularly serious because candidates still had no clear information about their conditions or available accommodations less than a month before the exams.