24 No. 59 JUSTICE was likely to have harassed Brian as a student identifying as Jewish. The OIA also thought that, in accordance with its Public Sector Equality Duty, the University could reasonably have engaged in discussions with the Students’ Union and the Palestine Society about the substantive issues raised in Brian’s complaint, but it failed to do this. Accordingly, the OIA recommended that the University compensate Brian to the tune of £2,500 for failing to deal properly with the blood libel charges. The OIA further recommended that the University work with the Students’ Union to raise awareness across campus of the legal framework governing freedom of speech and the University’s responsibility to ensure that staff, students and others are protected from harassment, discrimination and victimization.22 Conclusion: The Educational Challenges Ahead of Us As Brian’s case illustrates, UK universities need to follow a definition of antisemitism that recognizes that antisemitism can manifest itself in hostility to Israel, conceived of as the Jewish collective, and this was recently acknowledged by the UK Government. Following the Government’s formal adoption of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism in December 2016, Universities Minister, Jo Johnson MP, wrote a letter to Nicola Dandridge, Chief Executive of Universities UK (UUK), underlining the obligation of all UK universities to tackle antisemitism on campus, particularly in the context of "Israeli Apartheid Week" (IAW). He said that the Government expected that the legal position and the guidelines of the IHRAWorking Definition of Antisemitism “are universally understood and acted upon at all times” by UK universities, including policy towards events “that might take place under the banner of ‘Israel Apartheid’ events.”23 However, following her receipt of Jo Johnson’s letter, Nicola Dandridge informed all UK universities that the IHRA Definition did not preclude IAW events on campus from going ahead, provided they were properly handled and remained within the law. This indicates that Ms. Dandridge has overlooked the antisemitic nature of the term “Israeli Apartheid Week” itself, and particularly when it is used in conjunction with captions such as “100 years of settler-colonialism.”24 These terms amount to an allegation that Israel is a racist endeavor, and that it has been since its very inception; and for that reason, they fall within the IHRA Definition. One challenge ahead of us, therefore, is to assist Nicola Dandridge in her understanding of the antisemitic nature of the term "Israeli Apartheid Week," and the associated captions and activities that take place on campus during that time, and to respectfully ask her to revise the advice she has given to UK universities. Not only are these terms inherently antisemitic according to the IHRA Definition, but they promote real hostility towards Jewish and other students who support Israel. Another challenge ahead of us is to require UK universities to adopt the MacPherson Report 199925 to decide the matter of antisemitism. The MacPherson Report, which reported on the mishandling of the Stephen Lawrence murder, stipulated that a racist incident should be defined by the victim. The principle is applied in the case of anti-black racism on campus but not in the case of antisemitism. The MacPherson Principle does not mean that a person who reports an experience of racism should necessarily be considered to be right; but what it does mean is that it should be assumed that they are right and should be taken seriously and listened to carefully until an informed judgment can be made as to whether or not they are right. The adoption of the MacPherson Report was recommended by both the 2006 All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitism26 and the 2016 Select Committee. While both stated that the starting point for deciding the matter of antisemitism is the perception of the alleged victim, the Select Committee went further and said that an incident which is “perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person” is a strong basis for 22. There are several other laws that limit free speech on campus. These are discussed in the fuller version of this article on the IAJLJ website. 23. Universities Minister calls on UK Universities to tackle anti-semitism, particularly in context of ‘Israel Apartheid week’, CFI, Feb. 22, 2017 available at https://cfoi.co.uk/ universities-minister-calls-on-uk-universities-to-tackleanti-semitism-particularly-in-context-of-israel-apartheidweek/ (last visited March 28, 2017). 24. Letter from Jonathan Turner, Chair UKLFI, to Nicola Dandridge, Chief Executive of UUK, March 1, 2017. 25. Report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, Feb. 24, 1999, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277111/4262.pdf (last visited March 26, 2017). 26. All-Party Parliamentary Group against Antisemitism, Sept. 2006, available at www.antisemitism.org.uk/wp-content/ uploads/Al l-Party-Parl iamentary-Inquiry-intoAntisemitism-REPORT.pdf (last visited March 27, 2017]: “It is the Jewish community itself that is best qualified to determine what does and does not constitute antisemitism.”
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=