On Friday 20 September, a second public hearing debating the Commission of Inquiry into Antisemitism at Australian Universities Bill 2024 (No. 2) was held by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. Labor Senator Nita Green chaired the proceedings while Liberal Senators Sarah Henderson and Paul Scarr questioned individuals before the Committee.
The bill aims to establish a commission of inquiry with similar powers to that of a Royal Commission in order to “effectively probe the rise of antisemitism on campus in Australia”. The bill’s explanatory memorandum emphasised that it would “exclusively focus on antisemitism” in universities and “not extend to other aspects of Australian life”.
Vice-Chancellors Mark Scott (USyd), Ian Martin (Deakin), Monash’s Sharon Pickering, Genevieve Bell (ANU), UNSW’s VC Attila Brungs and Chief of Staff David Cross, and University of Adelaide’s Provost John Williams and Chief Operating Officer Peter Prest, all spoke to the claims that Australian universities have not adequately responded to the rise of antisemitism on campuses.
Speaking for the Australian Academic Alliance against Antisemitism, Associate Professor Efat Eilam highlighted two key issues: that “Jewish people are not feeling safe on campuses…and scared to engage with university life” and the “systemic failure” of Australian universities to address the antisemitism crisis.
During their speaking time, the Senators asked Jewish Council of Australia (JCA) representatives Dr Sarah Schwartz and Dr Elizabeth Strakosch if they “agree that all forms of anti-semitism are repugnant”, interrogating the JCA’s mission as an organisation.
Strakosch got cut off when Senator Henderson asked if slogans like “from the river to the sea” and “intifada” call for the destruction of Israel and are antisemitic. Strakosch spoke to needing to be clear on “feelings and facts”, giving an example of when the chant, “Vice-Chancellor you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide” was circulated on social media as “Vice-Chancellor you can’t hide, we want Jewish genocide”.
Following the hearing, the JCA published a statement saying that they “faced a hostile line of questioning by two non-Jewish members of the LNP, which was steeped in pro-Israel propaganda. This attempt to attack the Jewish Council, and refusal to accept that Jewish people might hold a variety of views, shows that this Coalition bill is a political stunt, not motivated out of concern for Jewish people.”
The Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS) President Noah Loven spoke to the fact that he and Vice-President Zachary Morris were elected representatives leading “the only organisation here that represents Jewish Students.”
Loven described the “untenable situation” where students are having to choose between their education and safety. Despite reaffirming the right to protest, he claimed that while some universities have “stepped up” others have allowed “hate to fester”.
Loven also said that protests have crossed a line to “intimidation which is designed to silence Jewish students and exclude them from university life” and that this is the moment to decide whether to “improve campus life for all students” or “play politics.”
Senator Green asked if the recent legislation to introduce a National Student Ombudsman could be used to address antisemitism amongst other student concerns and Professor Steven Power reiterated the need for safe reporting mechanisms for Jewish students. AUJS welcomed this suggestion but raised questions over issues of accountability and regulation of conduct that is “not within the ambit of the university”.
AUJS Vice-President Zachary Morris stated that there is “a complete lack of trust in the existing university systems” and that the administrative response was most concerning. Morris explained that AUJS received assurances about the monitoring of USyd’s Graffiti Tunnel but alleged that swastikas were left up for 2 weeks before being taken down.
Similarly, Senator Sarah Henderson asked Strakosch about the display of swastikas and crosses through the Star of David, which Strakosch denounced as hate speech before explaining because Israel’s flag bears the Star of David, “criticising states, including their flags is a legitimate form of political speech even though it is very uncomfortable.”
When asked about the universities role in not immediately removing encampments, Loven said that AUJS met with university administrations early on, and had warned that “if there’s no red lines when it comes to protests, things will get out of hand”.
“I can say with confidence that the University of Sydney is probably one of the worst places to be a Jewish student right now and Mark Scott has failed Jewish students”, Morris concluded.
USyd Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott’s opening statement, later shared in an all-student email, reaffirmed the rise of antisemitism within Australian society and that this is “reflected on university campuses, including the University of Sydney.”
“The testimonials are heart-breaking and unacceptable. And for that I am sorry. No one should feel at risk, unsafe or unwelcome at any place of learning. No one should feel the need to hide their identity or stay away from classrooms or campuses,” Scott continued.
As for the encampment, Scott stated that the University “prioritised engagement, non-violence and a peaceful resolution”, balancing of psychosocial safety, the various needs of a diverse student body and commitments to academic freedom and free speech.
Student organisers and activists like Students for Palestine and Students Against War have consistently rejected the presence of antisemitism within the Palestine solidarity movement, emphasising that Jewish students were part of the encampments and pro-Palestine protests.
On August 8, ACAR and BDS Youth had released a statement calling upon the Australian government to dissolve the role of the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, and reinstate the responsibilities to the Racial Discrimination Commissioner.
“The appointment of a Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism continues the settler-colonial practice of dividing minority groups along racial lines, suggesting that combating antisemitism and Islamophobia requires mutually exclusive and special attention. Anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab racism – which exist beyond Islamophobia – are left out of this equation entirely. In reality, Jewish safety is compromised by this genocide which is enacted by a state purporting to be representative of all Jews.”
Scott acknowledged that decisions “did not always meet the expectations of the Jewish community”, one of which was not communicating the agreement to end the encampment with the Jewish community prior to it being publicly announced but emphasised his commitment “to win back the trust and confidence of the University’s Jewish community.”
Senator Scarr also pressed upon AUJS’ Morris’ earlier claim that “after the first meeting with [Mark Scott], his chief of staff had to apologise for his behaviour as soon as he left the office” Senator Scarr invited Morris to make a confidential submission regarding this claim, which had also been echoed in AUJS’ submission to the Committee.
During the questioning, Scott said that he wanted to avoid situations like Columbia University and despite advice from the NSW Police, the University declined the involvement of riot police:
“So when discussions with NSW police, when we talk with them about the possibility of clearing the encampment, they informed us they would do so with fully equipped riot police on campus and we felt that the risk of the violence that would ensue from that the destruction of property, the other forces that would be unleashed would be a dramatic escalation as we were trying to deescalate the encampment and peaceably resolve it. And so that was a decision we made.”
The USyd submission had included reference to the Campus Access Policy and its commitment to reviewing it before the end of 2024, willingness to cooperate with sector regulator TEQSA, the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism and Special Envoy for Social Cohesion in judicial inquiries to combat antisemitism on campus.
Furthermore, there was note of an initiative to “understand and interrupt emerging cultures of polarisation both within and external to the University” as well as a commitment to “a truth-telling project that will not only focus on First Nations peoples, but will also chart aspects of antisemitism, Islamophobia and anti-Asian attitudes”.
Scott also revealed that an independent review of University policies and processes will be led by Bruce Hodgkinson AM SC, “a pre-eminent Senior Counsel with expertise in health and safety”.
A University spokesperson told Honi Soit reiterated the “top priority” of “rebuild[ing] trust with the Jewish community and ensuring the safety of the wider community.
They confirmed the commissioning of an “external review to ensure that its relevant processes and policies are appropriate and accord with applicable standards” which is anticipated to conclude “after [the] completion of the Senate Committee inquiry and report”.
The spokesperson spoke of last year’s anti-racism statement, and this year’s educational programming suite during “welcome and orientation period for students” as part of an ongoing process to address racism and prioritise truth-telling, in addition to “combating all forms of discrimination including antisemitism and Islamophobia in our workplace and campuses”. They also mentioned “delivering a series of innovative workshops for staff and students through our Sydney Policy Lab” for a “vibrant culture of thoughtful, democratic engagement across lines of difference.”
When asked about the adoption of the IHRA definition, the spokesperson stated that “alongside many other materials, [it] is included in a resource section designed to support the endorsed statement.”
“Accompanying notes acknowledge that two qualifying statements, proposed by the UK Home Affairs Select Committee and adopted by a number of other universities, are important considerations in conjunction with the IHRA definition in any discussion of antisemitism including: it is not antisemitic to criticise the government of Israel, without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent, and it is not antisemitic to hold the government of Israel to the same standards as other liberal democracies, or to take a particular interest in the Israeli government’s policies or actions, without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent.”
Following the proceedings, Jews Against Fascism released their Senate submission as a statement, which was endorsed by USyd’s Autonomous Collective Against Racism (ACAR):
“As an explicitly Jewish organisation, dedicated to fighting fascism and racism in all its forms, we write to make clear that we firmly believe that it is unnecessary – and counterproductive – to form a Commission of Inquiry into antisemitism in universities.”
They continued, “It is clear that while antisemitism exists in Australia, in its most pernicious forms it is to be found amongst the far-right, spread through organised online channels and on the streets, rather than in universities.”
Jews Against Fascism concluded by saying that “more work needs to be done to combat fascism and racism on university campuses” and that “it is evident that this Commission of Inquiry will not deal with these incidents.”
