Working definition of antisemitism
[8] The definition has been heavily criticised by academics, including legal scholars, who say that it is often used to weaponize antisemitism in order to stifle free speech relating to criticism of Israeli actions and policies.
Marcus writes, the larger issue was missed that the definition of antisemitism that the EUMC used was based on "seven stereotypical traits: deceptiveness, strange-ness, hostility, greed, corruption, conspiratorial power, and deicidal murderousness".
[23] Israeli scholar Dina Porat, then head of the Stephen Roth Institute at Tel Aviv University, proposed the idea for a common definition during an NGO conference organized by the American Jewish Committee (AJC).
[2] Meanwhile, the EUMC asked "selected Jewish NGOs and academics to provide a simple working definition that would encompass antisemitic demonization of Israel, and which could also be used by their own RAXEN network of national focal points and by law enforcement agencies".
[2] According to Michael Whine of the Community Security Trust, "the Director of the ODIHR Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Division and the Advisor on Antisemitism played an active role in formulating the Working Definition.
[34][better source needed] Canadian Members of Parliament adopted a resolution to combat antisemitism in 2007 that cited the EUMC definition, and the Australian Online Hate Prevention Institute.
[41][42] According to Ken Marcus, the United States Commission on Civil Rights, after investigating campus antisemitism, adopted the definition, to help universities identify the lines between hateful and non-hateful incidents.
[50] On 12 January 2016, Peter Roskam and Tim Scott introduced a bipartisan bill in the House and Senate on combating antisemitism on campus, under the title of The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, to codify the working definition.
[60][61][62] On 1 May 2024, amidst the ongoing 2024 pro-Palestinian protests on university campuses, the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which mandates the use of the IHRA definition by the Department of Education, was passed in the House by a margin of 320 to 91.
A dissenting opinion was shared by Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-San Diego), who is Jewish, who said the bill "fails to effectively address the very real rise of antisemitism, all while defunding colleges and universities across the country and punishing many, if not all, of the non-violent protestors speaking out against the Israeli military’s conduct.
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa chairman John Minto claimed that adopting the IHRA definition would silence criticism of Israeli human rights abuses against the Palestinians.
[132][non-primary source needed][133] On May 25, 2023, the Biden administration did not fully embrace the IHRA definition of Anti Semitism when it launched[134] the U.S. National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism despite significant pressure to do so, but noted it alongside the Nexus Document.
An attempt to enshrine the definition in US federal law in 2024 encountered strong opposition, with 1,200 Jewish academics opposing the move as a dangerous conflation of criticism of Israel with antisemitism that would threaten freedom of speech.
Among the committee's recommendations were "that the IHRA definition, with our additional caveats, should be formally adopted by the UK Government, law enforcement agencies and all political parties, to assist them in determining whether or not an incident or discourse can be regarded as antisemitic".
[98][152] In August 2019, Tower Hamlets London Borough Council refused to host the fifth annual charity bike ride event in aid of Palestinian children in Gaza called BigRide4Palestine due to concerns that criticism of Israel would violate the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.
[155] Twenty three signatories of an open letter to The Guardian stated that the council's refusal to host the charity event has vindicated concerns raised about the working definition and that it "demonstrates that freedom of expression on Palestine in this country is now being suppressed".
The signatories included Geoffrey Bindman, Lindsey German, Nadia Hijab, Kate Hudson, Dr Ghada Karmi, Mike Leigh, Jenny Manson, Kika Markham, Karma Nabulsi, Clare Short, Norman Warner, and Mark Serwotka.
[156] In September 2019, Robert Jenrick, the newly appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, wrote in the Sunday Express: The IHRA definition is an important tool for the police and other public bodies to understand how antisemitism manifests itself, ...
However, at the time their code of conduct approved in December 2017, which only governs the behavior of anyone representing the Party as an elected or appointed official or office-holder, did not mention antisemitism or specify a definition of it.
Their home affairs spokesman and former deputy leader, Shahrar Ali, told their annual conference the definition was "politically engineered to restrict criticism of Israel's heinous crimes upon the Palestinian people".
[182] In a July 2021 opinion piece for the activist Labour Briefing, Jonathan Rosenhead stated that the government pressure "didn't go down well with university administrations" and that the arrival of the new Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism has affected campus debate.
[184] In early 2022, on the occasion of International Holocaust Remembrance Day, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres reiterated a previous position, acknowledging "the efforts of countries that have agreed on the common definition of antisemitism" while at the same time avoiding any mention of adoption by the UN as demanded by supporters.
The United States envoy said he was "disappointed" that the report "politicized the IHRA definition" and Gilad Erdan, the Israeli ambassador criticised Achiume for making "unfounded recommendations" that "clearly demonstrate a political agenda".
This is the time to take the path to working with other minority groups, civil society organizations and human rights bodies to confront antisemitism within the context of a wider antiracist struggle, not to perpetuate the notion that Jews stand alone.
"[198][199] In February 2021, the lead signatory of that letter, Hagit Borer, opposed the Working Definition in the Times Higher Education Supplement, affirming that "It contradicts universities' commitment to free speech and academic freedom, and it undermines the ongoing fight against racism, including antisemitism, in all its ugly forms.
"[142] In July 2018, human rights solicitor Geoffrey Bindman wrote: "Unfortunately, the definition and the examples are poorly drafted, misleading, and in practice have led to the suppression of legitimate debate and freedom of expression.
"[142] In August 2018, Geoffrey Robertson QC, an expert on freedom of speech and human rights, said that the working definition fails to cover the most insidious forms of hostility to Jewish people.
He has opposed efforts to enshrine it in university policies[218] and in December 2016 wrote a letter to members of the US Congress warning that giving the definition legal status would be "unconstitutional and unwise".
"[222][223] In July 2018, a statement signed by 39 left-wing Jewish organizations in 15 countries, including six based in the UK, was released criticising the working definition, declaring that it was "worded in such a way as to be easily adopted or considered by western governments to intentionally equate legitimate criticisms of Israel and advocacy for Palestinian rights with antisemitism, as a means to suppress the former" and that "this conflation undermines both the Palestinian struggle for freedom, justice and equality and the global struggle against antisemitism.
[229] In February 2024, the American Civil Liberties Union wrote a letter to U.S. Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, warning that the IHRA definition of antisemitism could limit free speech about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at U.S. colleges and universities.
|