The Jewish Council is deeply concerned with many of the recommendations released yesterday by the Parliamentary Inquiry into Antisemitism at Australian Universities. While increasing rates of antisemitism are of serious concern, this series of inquiries has been overtly politicised.

The Jewish Council is strongly opposed to the recommendation for universities to adopt a definition of antisemitism based on the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism.

The IHRA definition was never intended to be used as a tool to regulate free speech and has been rejected by hundreds of scholars of antisemitism and Jewish studies, including its own author, as well as international human rights organisations. This is because the examples of antisemitism that it provides, such as calling the state of Israel ‘a racist endeavor’, have been weaponised to suppress criticism of Israel and silence Palestinian voices. Its examples also have the perverse effect of conflating Jewish identity with support for the state of Israel, something which increases antisemitism. Its widespread adoption in the university setting would undermine academic freedom of inquiry and speech.

The Jewish Council also considers that recommendations in regard to improving the transparency of complaints processes, improving wellbeing and safety, and increasing education around antisemitism, while important, will only be effective if integrated into a holistic antiracism strategy which is aimed at combating all forms of racism on campus. It will be ineffective, and counter-productive for universities to try and address antisemitism in isolation from other forms of racism. 

Dr Max Kaiser, Executive Officer, Jewish Council of Australia, said:

'This inquiry was never about genuinely interrogating racism at Australian universities, instead it has been an opportunity for politicians to play tough and bash universities. Recommending the adoption of politicised definitions of antisemitism aims at silencing political speech and repressing anti-war and anti-genocide protests at universities.

'The inquiry’s recommendation embedding the role of pro-Israel lobbyist Jillian Segal, the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, is counter-productive and political. Someone who thinks the keffiyeh is ‘distressing’, and has lobbied for the continuation of a war which has led to the mass destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza, cannot be trusted to play any role in tackling racism in Australian universities.'

Sarah Schwartz, Executive Officer, Jewish Council of Australia, said:

'Universities should be responding to antisemitism by implementing effective and principled antiracism strategies which acknowledge the interconnectedness of all forms of racism. To address antisemitism on campus, we must also address the racism faced by other racialised groups, including First Nations, Palestinian, Muslim, Arab, and Asian staff and students. 

'The adoption of politicised definitions of antisemitism will only serve to exacerbate anti-Palestinian racism and distract from the real problems of racism — including antisemitism — in our universities. International experience shows that the adoption of the IHRA definition will be used to silence Palestinian voices and voices opposed to Israel’s human rights abuses, including Jewish voices like ours, under the misleading banner of addressing antisemitism.'