A report into antisemitism on Australian campuses has recommended universities adopt a definition of antisemitism that “closely aligns” with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, which has been contested by Palestinians and some international civil society groups for effectively muting criticism of Israel.
The report, tabled on Wednesday by the chair of the parliamentary joint committee on human rights, the Labor MP Josh Burns, also recommends universities publish de-identified reports of complaints as part of a string of “urgent changes” to take place from semester one this year.
The committee, initiated in October, received more than 600 submissions, many from Jewish students and staff detailing their experiences of antisemitism.
The report found there was an “urgent need for reform” to ensure the safety of Jewish students and staff on university campuses and found the reluctance of university leaders to enforce “meaningful consequences” had allowed a “toxic environment to escalate”, resulting in a “lack of trust” between the Jewish community and universities.
It recommended universities simplify their complaints policies, including publishing de-identified complaints reports to “improve transparency”, and that universities adopt a clear definition of antisemitism that closely aligned with the controversial IHRA definition.
In their additional comments, the Coalition members of the committee said the government should amend the law so that all public universities were required to adopt the IHRA definition.
The IHRA says “targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity” is one example of how antisemitism could be manifested.
Among 11 specific examples it gives of antisemitism in public life is: “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
Critics have argued that interpretation means the definition can be used to shut down legitimate criticism of Israel and stifle freedom of expression, citing “unreasonable” accusations on campuses after the definition was adopted by many universities in the UK.
Australian universities have been split on whether to adopt the definition.
In January 2023, the University of Melbourne became the first institution to announce it would adopt the definition as part of its broader “anti-racism commitment”.
The report also requested the government consider whether the Fair Work Act should be amended to take action on university employees or recipients of Australian Research Council grants that had breached the Criminal Code or Racial Discrimination Act.
If the response by universities was insufficient, it recommended the government consider establishing a judicial inquiry into antisemitism.
It did not recommend the establishment of a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to antisemitism, as has been backed by the Coalition.
David Shoebridge, the Greens member of the committee, said in his additional comments he was “disappointed” by the “politicisation of the committee” to uncritically impose the IHRA definition and “restrict legitimate academic freedom of ARC recipients”.
“The IHRA definition is not grounded in contemporary antiracism scholarship or practice,” he said.
Burns said Jewish students had been “excluded from university life” and some had avoided attending campus.
“The status quo is not good enough and it must change before students return to campus in a few weeks’ time,” he said.
“It should not have taken a national antisemitism crisis and a parliamentary inquiry for universities to take the concerns of Jewish students and staff seriously – concerns they have been sharing for years.”
Burns said the report was released early in order for the recommendations to be implemented by the start of the 2025 academic year.
It made 10 recommendations:
Vice chancellors hold a formal meeting with Jewish student bodies and staff in semester one to discuss antisemitism on campuses;
Australian universities adopt a definition of antisemitism that “closely aligns” with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition;
Australian universities report on the outcome of complaints with greater transparency, including input from vice chancellors;
The government consider whether it needs to amend the Fair Work Act to enable disciplinary or “other action” be taken in relation to employees or ARC grantees that have breached the Criminal Code or Racial Discrimination Act;
Australian universities review and simplify their complaints procedures, including publishing regular de-identified reports of complaints received;
Universities consider increased investment in antisemitism research and opportunities for collaboration;
Universities deliver ongoing training to students, staff and leadership on recognising and addressing antisemitism;
The government consider expanding the compliance powers of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency on student wellbeing and safety;
The National Student Ombudsman review university practices to reduce antisemitism on campuses within 12 months;
The government give consideration to a judicial inquiry if the response by universities has been insufficient.
The Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim said the response of most university administrations to antisemitism had been “hopelessly inadequate” and welcomed recommendations to streamline complaints processes.
“While the report identifies the correct issues, some of the recommendations are expressed in less forthright language than we think the situation calls for,” he said, citing the IHRA definition which he said should have been adopted as a “straightforward definition”.
“We welcome the recommendation that a judicial inquiry be kept on the table as a possible future measure if universities do not clean up their act in the next 12 months,” he said.
The Zionist Federation of Australia Ceo, Alon Cassuto, said the report was a “first-step” in fixing antisemitism on campuses and similarly pressed for a judicial inquiry which “should have been established from the outset”.
Source link