JERUSALEM — ITIM filed a complaint against Sephardic Chief Rabbi David Yosef with Judicial Complaints Commissioner Asher Kula on July 7, 2026. The complaint accuses Rabbi Yosef of using his public and judicial position to encourage mikveh attendants to publicly shame women who choose to immerse without an attendant present.

The complaint was submitted in Rabbi Yosef's capacity as president of the Great Rabbinical Court. It followed remarks made by Rabbi Yosef two weeks prior at a conference for mikveh attendants. According to the complaint, Rabbi Yosef told attendants they could verbally rebuke women who immerse alone for acting against halacha, and that he acknowledged attendants could face legal consequences if they prevented a woman from immersing alone. The complaint states Rabbi Yosef said attendants could tell a woman that the chief rabbi had declared she was "defying the Torah."

Rabbi Yosef was quoted as saying, "Raise your voice and shout. That way, you have not broken the law, but you have shamed them into immersion with an attendant present." Rabbi Yosef's office stated that these attributed remarks had been quoted only in part and did not present the full picture. His office stated, "There was never any intention to harm women."

His office stated that everything he said at the conference was about welcoming women warmly, with kindness. It further stated that he said the matter of immersion without an attendant should be explained pleasantly, though clearly and firmly. Rabbi Yosef's office also stated that his sharper remarks were directed at women who act defiantly by relying on High Court rulings in halachic matters. "Certainly, every person must be treated with honor and dignity, all the more so women who come to fulfill a mitzvah," his office stated.

ITIM argued that Rabbi Yosef's clarification did not retract the substance of his original remarks. Instead, it reinforced the message that women who ask to immerse without an attendant are acting against Torah law. ITIM stated that Rabbi Yosef's comments were halachically harmful and that publicly shaming women over their manner of immersion constituted verbal wrongdoing. The complaint cited rabbinic sources and later halachic opinions that recognize immersion without an attendant as valid in certain circumstances.

A 2016 High Court of Justice ruling, stemming from an ITIM petition, affirmed that a woman requesting to immerse without a mikveh attendant or friend present may not be prevented from doing so. A Religious Services Ministry directive issued after this ruling states that if a woman asks to immerse alone, the attendant may explain that the responsibility for the halachic validity of the immersion rests with the woman herself, but may not press her beyond that. ITIM argued that Rabbi Yosef's remarks violated the ethics rules for dayanim, contradicted the High Court ruling and ministry procedure, and amounted to an improper use of his public position.