If adopted, Jillian Segal’s plan would enforce censorship of legitimate political, artistic and academic criticism of Israel through her recommendation that the discredited International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism be adopted. The definition conflates legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism (see editors note below) and was resoundingly rejected by the Federal Court of Australia on 4 July 2025, when Justice Stewart explained: “Political criticism of Israel, however inflammatory or adversarial, is not by its nature criticism of Jews in general or based on Jewish racial or ethnic identity… The conclusion that it is not antisemitic to criticise Israel is the corollary of the conclusion that to blame Jews for the actions of Israel is antisemitic; the one flows from the other.”
Jillian Segal recommends granting herself, an unelected official, unprecedented levels of power to censor the media and university and cultural institutions and to revoke government funding for breeches- a breathtakingly terrifying attack on free speech.
And, the Prime Minister:
What was he thinking when, rather than establishing a position of Special Envoy to Combat Racism and Religious Intolerance, PM Albanese hived off two positions- Antisemitism (Jillian Segal) and Islamophobia (Aftab Malik, appointed on 30 September 2024; his report is expected soon)?
Where was the due diligence concerning Jillian Segal’s suitability? Members of Parliament are required to make a declaration of their interests, including those of their spouse and dependent children, within 28 days of taking their oath or affirmation – surely no less would be expected of a Special Envoy.
Thirdly The Greens’ MP: for over two years now The Greens have borne witness to the attrocities unfolding in Gaza- an area half the size of Canberra with a population of more than two million. Senator Faruqi and others have consistently called for our Government to uphold international law by:
- Calling for a permanent ceasefire that sees the end of the occupation of disputed Palestinian territories by the State of Israel.
- Ending the two ways arms trade between Australia and the State of Israel
- Sanctioning members of the Israeli government directly involved in war crimes.
- Having Australia formally intervene on behalf of South Africa at the International Court of Justice and the commitment to uphold International Criminal Court warrants
Australia was invited to the 30-nation meeting of the Hague Group in Colombia last week to take the first steps to a UN General Assembly motion mandating member states support Israel ending its unlawful occupation of disputed Palestinian territories.
We should have been there: it’s not a matter of being on the right side of history; it’s a matter of being on the right side of NOW.
Elizabeth O’Hara is a long-time resident of Armidale, life-long New Englander and a member of New England Greens
Editors note: this article was edited to remove a legally problematic paragraph that reflected on an individual, and other minor edits for clarity and accuracy.
The IHRA working definition of antisemitism makes no reference to Israel, has been adopted widely, and is not in contradiction with the legal precedent given; the dispute is over the interpretation of examples given by the IHRA which seeks to give guidance on when criticising the State of Israel may be antisemitic. The IHRA guidance clearly states before the examples that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic“.
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.