Passions about Israel in Australian academic circles have been laid bare by a Senate inquiry into a proposal for a judicial investigation of antisemitism on campuses.

The Senate’s Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee is examining a  to establish a commission of inquiry into antisemitism at universities. It has attracted over 600 submissions, reflecting extraordinary interest in what is essentially an inquiry into an inquiry.

The bill was introduced into the Senate by shadow education minister Sarah Henderson after debate on almost identical legislation, sponsored by former shadow attorney general Julian Leeser, was stonewalled in the House of Representatives.

Jewish and Liberal Party-aligned groups want the inquiry to proceed, while Palestinian organisations and unionists contend that the  into all forms of racism – being conducted by the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) – is more appropriate.

�鶹

Such positioning is not universal, with the Jews Against Fascism group insisting that an inquiry would be counterproductive because the “most pernicious forms” of antisemitism are not in universities. “Pro-Palestine protests on campus have consistently denounced antisemitism and included Jewish students,” its submission says. “These protesters are our allies against racism and antisemitism.”

But state Labor parliamentarian Marjorie O’Neill said antisemitism on university campuses had been a “serious issue” for many years. “The future of our higher education sector depends on our ability to confront and overcome this challenge,” her submission says. “I urge the Senate to take decisive action.”

�鶹

David Solomon, chief executive of the Australian Friends of Tel Aviv University, said antisemitism on campuses had “grown exponentially” since the 7 October attacks. “Only a judicial inquiry with the power to compel witnesses, seize documents, provide immunities [and] take evidence in camera…will be sufficient to achieve the cultural change the university sector needs,” his submission says.

Nick Riemer, National Tertiary Education Union branch president at The University of Sydney, said singling out a particular form of racism was wrongheaded. “Weaponising the legitimate and necessary struggle against antisemitism for the narrow purpose of suppressing opposition to the genocidal practices of the state of Israel seriously undermines the combat against all racism, antisemitism included,” his submission says.

Mr Leeser told parliament that antisemitism had been “off the charts”, with students spat on and taunted with swastikas while expat Israeli staff were harassed and told to resign. “It’s not just students and outside activists propagating this stuff – it’s professors and PhDs. I don’t believe university leaders are antisemitic. But I do believe that they are wilfully blind.”

He said the AHRC inquiry was “woefully inadequate”, with the commission proving itself “unready and unwilling” to deal with a sevenfold increase in antisemitic incidents since 7 October.

�鶹

The AHRC said Mr Leeser’s proposal “should be considered within a broader framework of measures…to address antisemitism and racism more broadly”. But it acknowledged “significant concerns…about the increase in antisemitism on university campuses”.

Of the 10 universities and university networks that made submissions to the committee, most offered no view on the need for a judicial inquiry. But some advocated a broader examination that extended to other forms of discrimination and settings beyond campuses.

Macquarie University vice-chancellor Bruce Dowton suggested that “a non-judicial form of review, which is more consultative and representative, would be more appropriate”. The University of Sydney’s Mark Scott speculated that a commission of inquiry could drive “further polarisation” in universities and the wider community. Monash University’s Sharon Pickering warned that it could be “used as a platform” to “exacerbate antisemitic behaviour and distract from…finding solutions”.

Universities Australia said it could “disrupt” current work, including the AHRC inquiry and the government’s July appointment of lawyer and philanthropist  as special envoy to combat antisemitism.

�鶹

Ms Segal, who addressed the committee in a hastily organised 17 September hearing, said a judicial inquiry was the best way to achieve the “massive cultural change” needed to tackle the “systemic embedded antisemitism” in campuses. “Universities [and their] hierarchies…do not understand or appreciate the unique, embedded and normalised extent of this particular type of racism,” she said.

Ms Segal, a former deputy chancellor of UNSW Sydney, said antisemitism was “different to other forms of racism” and a “generalised” inquiry was not the answer. Nor was the AHRC, which had lost the trust of the Jewish community. “We have, I believe, quite a crisis in our universities,” she told the committee.

�鶹

A full day’s hearing was scheduled for 20 September, ahead of the committee’s report on 4 October.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com