|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In a ruling published Aug. 17, Justice Desmond Fagan of Australia’s New South Wales Supreme Court rejected the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism and ruled that anti-Israel slogans spray-painted in a Sydney suburb did not constitute hatred of Jews.
Fagan noted the area had a high proportion of Jewish residents but found that the man responsible committed the offenses for money and drugs, not out of antisemitic hatred.
Fagan dismissed a state application seeking to place 22-year-old Mohommed Farhat under a year-long extended supervision order after his prison sentence expired.
Farhat pleaded guilty to 15 offenses stemming from a November 2024 vandalism spree in Woollahra. Vehicles were defaced with slogans including “f*** Israel” and “PKK coming,” an apparent reference to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party.
Fagan found that another person had “incited and directed” Farhat to commit the crimes in exchange for $4,000 and drugs. The judge characterized him as a “vandal for hire” rather than an “antisemitic bigot,” and concluded that he “did not intend to express hatred of Jews.”
The slogans amounted to “objectively, crude expressions of political hostility to the state of Israel” and a “curse against a foreign state,” Fagan wrote. He added that displaying them in the area did not “imbue the curse with an antisemitic character.”
Fagan also rejected the IHRA definition, calling its core text “so verbose and imprecise that it could not realistically be attributed to the ordinary, reasonably informed member of the Australian public.” He said the definition did not reflect the established Australian understanding of antisemitism, and cited objections the far-left Jewish Council of Australia had raised in a submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion.
The judge further stated that the IHRA formulation “propounds a concept different from that which ‘antisemitism’ has long been understood to describe and appropriates that word to the novel concept.”
The IHRA working definition is essential because contemporary antisemitism often disguises itself as political activism directed at Israel and Zionism. Its 11 examples help governments, courts, schools, and law enforcement distinguish legitimate criticism of Israeli policy from demonization, double standards, denial of Jewish self-determination, and collective blame against Jews. Without a shared standard, modern Jew-hatred can evade recognition and accountability.
Take Action
CAM has launched Report It, a secure app to report antisemitic incidents anonymously and in real time. Don’t stay silent. Download it today on the Apple App Store or Google Play. See it. Report it. Stop it.
