Financial news

Civil society groups urge UN not to adopt working definition of antisemitism citing misuse – JURIST

60 civil society groups Monday implored the UN and world leaders to step up efforts to combat antisemitism. In an open letter to the UN, the advocacy groups emphasized the need for practical anti-antisemitism measures.The civil societies discouraged the UN from adopting the “working definition of antisemitism,” as posed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). This is because the definition has improperly labelled anyone critical of Israel and activists as “antisemitic.” The working definition defines antisemitism as:[A] certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.  Antisemitism manifests itself through rhetoric and physical manifestations directed at Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, as well as Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”Several governments, as well as the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief Ahmed Shaheed, have called for the working definition to be adopted in the interest of combating antisemitism. Antisemitic sentiments have been on the rise worldwide, with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) demonstrating 3,697 antisemitic incidents in the US alone during 2022, a 36 percent increase from the 2,717 incidents recorded in 2021.Despite this, the civil society groups discouraged adopting the working definition, echoing recent concerns from Ken Stern, the main drafter of the working definition. According to Stern, the working definition–as it stands now–could effectively label anyone as antisemitic. One of the working definition’s indicators for antisemitism is the denial of Jewish people’s right to self-determination by calling the Israeli state’s existence a “racist endeavor.” Stern warns that this may label legitimate criticisms of the Israeli state as antisemitic, despite pointing out legitimate crimes against humanity or human rights violations. For example, criticisms of Israel’s recent dispossession of Palestinian lands could be deemed antisemitic, which Stern and the civil society groups appear to disagree with.The letter reads, in part:As an international organization committed to the universal promotion of the rule of law and human rights, the UN should ensure that its vital efforts to combat antisemitism do not inadvertently embolden or endorse policies and laws that undermine fundamental human rights, including the right to speak and organize in support of Palestinian rights and to criticize Israeli government policies.Instead, the civil society groups recommend two other working definitions that they believe are far less likely to be misused. The two definitions are laid out by the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism and the Nexus Document by a task force affiliated with Bard College and the University of Southern California. The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism defines antisemitism as discrimination or hostility towards Jews on the basis of being Jewish. The Nexus Document defines antisemitism as:[Consisting] of anti-Jewish beliefs, attitudes, actions or systemic conditions. It includes negative beliefs and feelings about Jews, hostile behaviour directed against Jews (because they are Jews), and conditions that discriminate against Jews and significantly impede their ability to participate as equals in political, religious, cultural, economic, or social life.The letter to the UN follows a letter from Human Rights Watch to the co-sponsors of a proposed American Bar Association (ABA) Resolution 514 on Antisemitism. In the letter, the organization advised the ABA not to adopt the resolution for the same reasons. Ultimately, the ABA adopted a definition of antisemitism that did not reference the IHRA working definition.