37 Winter 2015-2016 As the fate of the EUMC’s (European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia) Working Definition demonstrates, we are forced to make a careful evaluation whether efforts aimed at the incorporation of such definitions into criminal codes and other legally binding laws have any chance to be successful.12 The key question, however, is about the rationality of such a move. Perhaps, instead of a precise definition with a list of manifestations of anti-Israeli attitudes that must be considered to be antiJewish, it would be better to insist that European governments obligatorily include the Working Definition into the official training materials for law enforcement officers and others. If such an important problem is left to the decision of individual prosecutors and judges, proper protection cannot be guaranteed. Consider the Austrian case of 2015: “I could have annihilated all the Jews in the world, but I left some of them alive so you will know why I was killing them…” -- Ibrahim B. wrote on his Facebook page. Ibrahim, the 29-year-old owner of a hair salon, attributed the quote to Hitler and posted a picture of the German dictator on his Facebook site. Ibrahim launched his pro-Nazi tirade in the context of criticizing Israel’s military action against Hamas. The Austrian Prosecutor described Ibrahim’s statements as merely expressing “displeasure toward Israel” and not a glorification of Hitler.13 Undoubtedly, there is a pressing need for redesigning the existing legal framework in a way that will allow for the inclusion of anti-Israeli hatred and discrimination as basis for legal response. The question that remains open is how to accomplish that in the most effective way, in full accordance with the standards of human rights protection. Silencing the legitimate critics of state actions (no matter what state it is) is not an issue or aim here at all. The main object of concern is the need (or rather an obligation) to protect individuals affected adversely by hatred and discrimination. n Dr. Gliszczyńska-Grabias is Assistant Professor at the Poznań Human Rights Centre, Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences. She specializes in the fields of antidiscrimination law, constitutional law, freedom of speech vs. hate speech and "memory laws." She authored a book Combating Antisemitism: International Law Instruments (in Polish, Wolters Kluwer: Warsaw 2014), as well as a number of book chapters, articles and commentaries on international and regional human rights systems, anti-discrimination law, and related issues. She actively participates in various civil society activities to combat discrimination and hate speech, and is a frequent speaker in the media on those issues. 12. See in particular: Dina Porat, The International Working Definition of Antisemitism and Its Detractors, 5 ISRAEL JOURNAL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS 93-101 (2011). 13. The initial decision of the Prosecutor has been re-examined and eventually quashed, resulting in charges laid against Ibrahim B. See the report on the case: Austrian prosecutor: Call to kill Jews is legal criticism of Israel, JERUSALEM POST, available at www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Austrian-prosecutorCall-to-kill-Jews-is-legal-criticism-of-Israel-390760 (last visited Dec. 13, 2015). Dr. Wolfgang Brandstetter, Austrian Federal Minister of Justice, and Irit Kohn Photo: Andreas W. Rausch Mag. Johanna Mikl-Leitner, Austrian Federal Minister of Interior, and Irit Kohn Photo: Andreas W. Rausch
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=