Australian universities¡¯ definition of antisemitism is so poorly drafted that it will not achieve any of its objectives but will exacerbate anti-Jewish sentiment by stifling legitimate criticism of Israel, a legal academic has warned.

Southern Cross University law dean David Heilpern, a Holocaust survivor¡¯s son who served as a New South Wales magistrate for more than two decades, said the definition was so ¡°confused, ambiguous and difficult to apply¡± that it would be more hindrance than help.

¡°If this definition is the basis for disciplinary proceedings, then I predict it will be self-defeating because of the ambiguity,¡± he said. ¡°And to use it as an educational framework would be counterproductive. In those circumstances, do you end up making campuses safer for anybody? The answer is no.¡±

The 193-word definition was developed on the urging of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. It was endorsed in late February by 39 vice-chancellors, who vowed to incorporate it into their complaints schemes, disciplinary processes and educational programmes about antisemitism.

51³Ô¹Ï

The definition should also inform the Higher Education Standards Framework used to regulate the sector, according to .

Heilpern said the definition was an ¡°improvement¡± on the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance version, which many universities have rejected as incompatible with academic freedom. But outlining his objections in a , he said a sentence explaining how criticism of Israel could constitute antisemitism was open to multiple interpretations because of its imprecise language.

51³Ô¹Ï

He told 51³Ô¹Ï that the definition would have ¡°a great deal more teeth¡± and ultimately be more functional if the ¡°offending¡± sentence were removed. But a complete rewrite would be preferable, he said.

¡°I¡¯d suggest that the universities of Australia withdraw the current definition and start again, [enlisting] somebody with some good legal background in statutory interpretation to assist in ensuring that it can fulfil its needs.

¡°If you¡¯ve got a definition that effectively shuts down a whole¡­range of discussions and questioning that otherwise could take place within a university context, then you¡¯re just going to create walls of silence that¡­lead to a situation of paranoia.¡±

Citing his experience as a magistrate, he said poor definition of crimes ¨C offensive language, for example ¨C led to ¡°bad use of police discretion¡± and ¡°a hell of lot of court cases¡±. He predicted similar outcomes if universities used their new definition for disciplinary purposes.

51³Ô¹Ï

¡°If the¡­academic creator of the definition struggles to apply it in a range of circumstances, then how is the public meant to do that? Or students? Or staff?¡±

One of the definition¡¯s authors, Monash University Holocaust expert David Slucki, was unable to say whether the chants ¡°Israel is a terrorist state¡± and ¡°from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free¡± constituted antisemitism under its terms.

¡°No matter how perfect we think we¡¯re going to get a definition, it¡¯ll always be contested,¡± Slucki conceded during a . ¡°I don¡¯t think it¡¯s perfect because I don¡¯t think any definition is going to be perfect.¡±

Staff and student groups have pledged their intention to thwart universities¡¯ adoption of the definition. The National Tertiary Education Union opposes the definition and has vowed not to allow it to be incorporated in enterprise agreements.

51³Ô¹Ï

¡°[It] is already having a chilling effect on academic and intellectual freedom,¡± . ¡°Staff and students [are] self-censoring as they struggle to interpret how it may be applied through as yet undefined but threatened disciplinary processes. The ambiguous wording of the definition is leading to confusion and uncertainty.¡±

Heilpern, who stressed that he was not speaking on behalf of his university, questioned the need for a definition at all. ¡°We don¡¯t have a definition of islamophobia [or] racism, to my knowledge. We all know what non-academic misconduct is. It¡¯s defined clearly in every university¡¯s rules.¡±

51³Ô¹Ï

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com