Professor Calls for ‘Antisemitism’ to Be Redefined Under Anti-Vilification Laws

Signage and tents are seen at the pro-Palestine encampment at the Deakin University Burwood campus in Melbourne, Australia, on May 14, 2024. AAP Image/James Ross

Universities should alter anti-discrimination laws so that antisemitism is legally recognised as a form of anti-vilification, one professor says.

“Racism manifests in different ways for different groups,” said Professor Katherine Gelber of the University of Queensland, during a Senate inquiry into antisemitism on Dec. 12.

“For instance, the racism faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is distinct. Until now, we haven’t developed separate definitions for these different manifestations of racism within Australian law.”

Antisemitism has steadily risen in Australia since the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, with tensions hitting fever pitch after a Melbourne synagogue was firebombed.

University campuses have been a key site for social tension as pro-Palestine events continue.

Gelber said universities needed more clarity on how to define antisemitism and hate speech.

Globally, Gelber said Australia had unique laws, which allowed earlier intervention in hate speech compared to criminal provisions in countries like the UK or the United States.

“Australia’s civil vilification laws are unique internationally, offering us the ability to intervene earlier in cases of harmful speech,” she noted, adding that only some Canadian provinces adopt similar frameworks.

Navigating the Line Between Free Speech and Hate Speech

Professor Gelber said it was a challenge to differentiate between free from hate speech.

However, she said antisemitic expression was more than an offence and equated it with prejudice.

“It’s more than just hurting someone’s feelings. It’s when speech leads to real, substantive public harm,” Gelber explained.

While clear legal boundaries exist for symbols like Nazi imagery, Gelber noted the complexity of cases with pro-Palestine slogans.

“There’s a lively debate in the community over whether certain slogans or phrases in these protests are antisemitic or not,” she said, stressing the importance of context.

She advocated for education on the matter.

Melbourne University Strengthens Anti-Semitism Measures

Nicola Phillips, the interim vice chancellor of the University of Melbourne, said it had learned a great deal over the past 14 months (since Oct. 7) and has proactively addressed campus tensions.

“There has been some activity that has been unacceptable on our campuses as in society at large. On such occasions, we have been clear in our condemnation of the conduct and have taken action.”

She highlighted that the university was quick to respond to antisemitic behaviour, and has worked with third parties including the federal special envoys for antisemitism and Islamophobia.

“We have been systematic in the application of our policies and procedures to guide our approach and decision-making, especially in relation to managing conflict,” she told the Committee.

The university has committed to a comprehensive review of its policies in 2025.

UNSW Tightens Security, Combats Anti-Semitism

Professor Verity Firth, representing the University of New South Wales said they had held consultations to upgrade their anti-racism policy to include anti-religious vilification, and also enhanced its code of conduct.

The university has also implemented increased physical security measures, such as additional patrols and security guards, as well as the monitoring and removing material that violates the code of conduct.

The safety culture has been further supported through improved risk assessments for events and updated student orientation programs focused on the university’s expectations for behaviour, particularly concerning anti-racism and anti-religious vilification policies.

“We’ve increased the promotion of pathways to make complaints or raise concerns, and we’ve significantly expanded resources for staff handling these complaints,” Firth explained.