THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW - Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean

Lesson # 311 • Laws of Informers

We come now to a topic that is frequently used by governmental authorities to obtain information about its citizens, such as offering rewards for information leading to the arrest of a wanted person.

Reuven, either voluntarily or under threat from a brigand, informs the brigand of the location of Shimon's assets (his real or personal property, or money). As a result of the information provided by Reuven, the brigand seizes Shimon's assets. There are times when Reuven is liable to Shimon and there are times when he is not.

The halacha regarding informers differentiates two types threats by brigands, i.e. physical or monetary.

The character of Shimon is irrelevant
The bad or wicked character of Shimon is of no significance in the defense of Reuven the informer, even if Shimon is deemed wicked by the community or if he is one who sins for personal satisfaction. Even if Shimon was mean to Reuven, Reuven may not inform against, him to the brigand.

Furthermore it is a tradition that anyone who is an informer without having been physically threatened has no part in the World to Come. He goes to Hell and never emerges from there.

The community, according to the instruction of Beth Din, may punish whoever is presumed to be an informer, (except one who is physically threatened). He may be punished even before he actually informs, if he only threatens to do so. After proper warnings, such punishments may include beatings, ostracisms, requesting punishment by the secular non-Jewish courts, and other methods that Beth Din deems proper.

Although ordinarily Beth Din may not hear testimony if a party is not present, in the case of an informer, they may accept testimony about him even if he is not present, and may be less strict in deciding a case against him. The informer is not permitted to take any oath in Beth Din that would be beneficial to him.

Whatever sanctions may be taken against an informer may also be taken against one who hired, encouraged, or instructed him to do such an act.

Shimon may employ any means available to save himself from Reuven including causing damage to Reuven's property and inflicting injury on Reuven.

All of the foregoing sanctions against Reuven apply only if he is not physically threatened. If the brigand physically threatens Reuven, he is not liable to these sanctions, although there are times that he has monetary liability to Shimon. Similarly, if Reuven admits to being an informer he is not subject to the sanctions described above, but he must still make the necessary payments to Shimon. In all situations Reuven should consult a competent Rabbi to discuss how he can gain forgiveness from Shimon and the community. Only then can God forgive him. There are times when Reuven the informer is not liable to Shimon. Reuven is free of liability under the following circumstances:

1. If Reuven is threatened by a brigand with physical harm or death to disclose Shimon's assets, and he does so. Reuven must reasonably conclude that if he does not comply with the demands of the brigand to disclose the whereabouts of Shimon's assets, then he risks physical injury or even death at the hands of the brigand. Although one may not save himself by using the assets of his fellow, in this situation the brigand has already fixed his intent to forcibly obtain Shimon's assets; Reuven is not the proximate cause of the loss to Shimon.

2. Shimon seeks to flee paying his debts to his creditors and Reuven informs the creditors who then stop Shimon. Reuven is not an informer since Shimon is indebted to his creditors.

However, if as a result of Reuven informing the creditors, Shimon pays more than his debts, Reuven must compensate Shimon for his loss. Some of the Codes speak of the practice of Beth Din or community leaders to advise merchants regarding those who seek to purchase on credit and do not pay their bills or borrow and do not repay the loans. This extends to all types of business practices, naming those who adulterate company products. Or those who pass off gold plate for solid gold. The Codes speak of this as a commendable practice to be instituted in all communities. It is also maintained that when the Gentiles observe such practice they will respect Jewish beliefs.

Reuven is liable to Shimon for the value of the property or money seized under the following circumstances:

1. Reuven voluntarily informs about Shimon's assets without threat of physical harm to disclose Shimon's assets.

2. As a result of Reuven's actions the brigand knows of Shimon’s assets. For example, Shimon retains Reuven to sell a precious stone for him. Reuven decides not to sell the stone and returns the stone to Shimon in the presence of a brigand. The brigand then forcibly takes the stone from Shimon. Another example is if two partners, Reuven and Shimon, loan money to the ruler. The ruler forces Reuven to forgive the entire debt, which he does. In this case Reuven is free of liability to Shimon for his half of the debt.

3. A brigand threatens Reuven with monetary loss if he does not disclose where Shimon is and/or where Shimon has his assets, and Reuven informs the brigand. Reuven is liable to Shimon for the value of the assets and he is liable to Shimon for all of Shimon's suffering.

There is a view that holds that if the brigand threatens Reuven with monetary loss unless Reuven supplies a product such as liquor, without specifying Shimon's liquor, and Reuven tells the brigand where Shimon's liquor is found, Reuven is liable if he has liquor of his own. But if he has no liquor of his own and he tells the brigand of Shimon's liquor, Reuven is not liable.

4. If a brigand threatens Reuven, even with physical harm, to disclose his own assets, and he shows the brigand Shimon's assets, or if he shows the brigand both his own and Shimon's assets.

5. If the brigand threatens Reuven, even with physical harm, to bring him provisions, without specifying Shimon's provisions, and Reuven tells the brigand that Shimon has such provisions; the brigand takes Shimon's provisions.

6. Reuven physically touches the asset that he hands over to a brigand. This applies even if he was forced by the brigand to do so. For example, Reuven and Shimon are in dispute as to ownership of property, real or personal, each one claiming sole ownership. Reuven turns the property over to a brigand or a government official. Beth Din will compel Reuven to retrieve the property that he handed over and Beth Din will then determine ownership. However, technically Reuven is not an informer, since he had not intended that the brigand would keep the property but would only hold it to preserve it for Reuven. There is authority that Reuven is deemed to be an informer in this situation and is therefore liable to Shimon for the loss.

We shall IYH complete this topic in the next lesson.

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in volume X chapter 388 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via website: www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores. Questions to quint@inter.net.il