In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.
On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:
Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.
This means that it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize Israel for the occupation of Palestinian territories or the Nation-State law.
Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
The clause “are not limited to” may be the basis for Jeremy Corbyn’s attempt and the final NEC decision to adopt an extra explanation over legitimate criticism of Israeli coalition issues.
Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
This includes the Hamas charter, Nazism, KKK, and all other Jihadist or Neo-Nazi groups, and occasionally Islamist or pan-Arabist groups. Mohammed Morsi, the elected Egyptian President at 2012, once declared that Allah let Hitler to kill Jews.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
This includes the message of Labour MP Lisa Forbes during the election about a Mossad conspiracy, much of the content of Hamas Charter, most conspiracy websites, and other issues. Variants of this theory also occasionally appear among frustrated Palestinians who seek to reveal some little-known information about Palestinians, as they often accuse Jews of controlling the media to hide the truth(when in reality BBC and other British media are fairly critical towards the Israeli government)
Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
This includes much of the Palestinian or Syrian political cartoon, much of the comments on the tweets of MPs who stand with the JLM, and most conspiracy websites.
Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
This includes much of Syrian, Iranian and Palestinian Nationalist propaganda that appear online, as well as most alt-right groups.
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
The same with the explanation above.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Common among alt-left, alt-right, and Islamist propaganda. The message that gets Peter Willsman expelled is a form of this example.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
The most contentious clause on the issue. While this would not prevent common left-wing criticisms of Israel, like the occupation of the territories, statements of Israeli PM about Arabs, Nation-State Law, Netanyahu’s collaboration with Kahanists, Khan al-Ahmar demolition(all opposed by JLM and typical progressive Zionist groups), it would render the Arab nationalist idea of a single integral Arab homeland and the idea of an exclusively Arab Palestine as being antisemitic. Supporting a single state of all Southern Levantines would not be antisemitic per se, and context should be taken when single-binational-state supporters are involved.
Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
Another controversial issue. While this targets much of the Syrian propaganda(which denounces Israeli action in West Bank while justifying Syrian abuse of human rights) and Arab nationalist claims about Israel(which claims that Israel cannot be a Jewish state while Arab countries must be Arab states), it may also targets people who call for right of return for Palestinians only and those who believe in a binational Palestine yet recognizing the split of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. On the issue of right of return, this may also cause controversy as there are groups that back the right of return for expelled ethnic groups(Sudeten Germans, Palestinians, Chagossians, Sephardic Jews), but supporters for right of return for each displaced ethnic group are not necessarily overlapping. This clause must be carried out carefully to ensure that it would not be abused to clamp down on otherwise legitimate critics of Israel, since it may be unclear whether someone holds double standard against Israel.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
Common among political cartoons published in the Middle East and by anti-Zionist groups.
Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
This clause is another controversial clause. Argumentum ad hitlerum itself, especially when applied to Israel or Jews, can be very offensive and dangerous, since it can indicate that some forms of antisemitism may be justified or that a violent destruction of Israel is a just action, or it would offend the feelings of many Jews and Israelis.
Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
The clause applies to much of the hateful trolls related to Israel and Palestine as well as much of the Islamist calls in mosques worldwide. This form of racism is particularly common on Twitter, especially during Israeli-Hamas wars.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property — such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries — are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
