The exclusion of Palestinian voices from the royal commission on antisemitism and social cohesion in Australia has sparked a heated debate, with the peak body for Palestinians in Australia, the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN), being denied leave to appear before the commission. This decision has raised concerns about the potential for an incomplete and polarizing account of the rise in antisemitism, as well as the misrepresentations of criticism of Israel as antisemitic.
APAN's 259-page submission, which included testimony from experts on Middle Eastern history, Judaism, and international law, argued that antisemitism is often conflated with anti-Zionism, which is counterproductive to tackling antisemitism and delegitimizes criticism of Israel's policies and actions. The network expressed deep concern that the inquiry would rely heavily on submissions equating criticism of Israel, Zionism, and Israel's actions in Gaza with hatred of Jewish people, without rigorous inquiry.
The commission's decision to exclude APAN has been met with disappointment by the network's president, Nasser Mashni, who argued that the Australian Palestinian community and its allies deserve the same democratic access as any other group. Mashni emphasized the importance of being able to criticize the policies of the Israeli government and the actions of the Israel Defense Forces without that criticism being equated with antisemitism or hatred of Jews.
The first week of hearings heard testimony from several witnesses, including Jewish groups such as the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, that being Jewish in Australia was being unfairly conflated with support for the actions and policies of the government of Israel. The commission's focus on defining antisemitism and its historical and contemporary manifestations has raised questions about the potential for a one-sided process, with serious ramifications for those who have been excluded, and more broadly, for the Palestinian struggle for liberation.
The exclusion of Palestinian voices from the royal commission has sparked a heated debate, with concerns about the potential for an incomplete and polarizing account of the rise in antisemitism, as well as the misrepresentations of criticism of Israel as antisemitic. The decision to exclude APAN has been met with disappointment by the network, who argue that the Australian Palestinian community and its allies deserve the same democratic access as any other group.
