We, the undersigned university academic staff, professional staff and students, call on the university executive to reject the Universities Australia (UA) and International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definitions of antisemitism as divisive, destructive to academic and intellectual freedom, promoting anti-Palestinian racism against Palestinians and our allies, and likely to worsen antisemitism.

All forms of bigotry and discrimination, including antisemitism, must be addressed wherever they occur. We are alarmed that both the UA and IHRA definitions of antisemitism conflate legitimate criticism of Israel, or the political ideology of Zionism, with discrimination against Jewish identity. This conflation risks making both antisemitism and anti-Palestinian racism on campus more prevalent and more acute. 

The first order of business should be to address racism faced by First Nations people by the founding settler-colonial racism of this country and its university institutions. Secondly, dealing with antisemitism by adapting both the UA and IHRA definitions of antisemitism has anti-Palestinian racism effects, and it also has the effect of covering over that founding racism.

Universities are regulatory laboratories. When governments and regulators succeed in making universities police political speech through discrimination law, that model does not stay on campus. It becomes the template for workplaces and public institutions. If criticism of a state or ideology can be redefined as racism inside universities, the same logic can later be applied to journalists, unions, NGOs and protesters across society. That is how exceptional rules for campuses become normalised limits on democratic speech everywhere.

Universities Australia (UA) and its 39 member universities have repeatedly reaffirmed their commitment to academic freedom and freedom of expression, underscoring these principles as ‘foundational to the higher education sector’s mission’. All 39 member universities have adopted the UA’s 2018 statement on freedom of expression, which declares: 

“Universities have a special role as institutions dedicated to free, open and critical expression across the full scope of human knowledge and endeavour. Central to this role is the freedom of staff and students to teach, research, debate and learn independent of external political circumstance and pressure.”

The UA definition, a modified version of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, poses a serious threat to academic freedom and to Palestinian students and staff as it erroneously links legitimate criticism of a state and a political ideology to a form of racism, as stated by Amnesty International. The UA definition lacks clarity, seeks to stifle discussion about Palestinian human rights, and is leveraged to repress critical discussion regarding settler colonialism and Israel’s apartheid regime. This factsheet elaborates on the IHRA definition and highlights serious concerns relating to its content and application, concerns that extend to the UA definition given the clear similarities. 

The adoption of this politicised speech code by Australian higher education institutions has already had far-reaching implications for university staff and students. The People’s Inquiry into Campus Free Speech on Palestine published its 2026 final report entitled ‘Erasure in the Academy: Surveillance, Punishment and Silencing on Palestine’, based on over 150 written submissions from 20 universities and testimony from its public hearings. The report shows that Australian universities have “policed speech, obstructed events, censored classroom content, intervened in teaching, changed policies to restrict and police protest, surveilled staff and students, disciplined individuals engaged in peaceful protest, applied grossly unfair double standards, and weaponised antisemitism to shut down legitimate criticism and protest of Israel’s actions in Gaza.” 

Racism in all forms is indeed a serious problem. That is why we have the Racial Discrimination Act. The UA and IHRA definitions of antisemitism are not grounded in contemporary anti-racism scholarship or practice, in fact they go against current evidence-based best practice, making the necessary work of eliminating racism more difficult. 

The adoption of these definitions effectively excludes staff and students’ experiences of anti-Palestinian racism (APR), a form of racism that silences, excludes, erases, stereotypes, defames or dehumanises Palestinians and their allies. The Australian Human Rights Commission’s 2026 Racism@Uni Report found that 90.2% of all Palestinian respondents experience racism at university. Nearly 65% of incidents of direct racism experienced by Palestinian university staff included participation by university leadership, the highest level of any population sub-group. 

We refer you to additional resources regarding anti-Palestinian racism on Australian campuses, such as the People’s Inquiry into Campus Free Speech report, and the report titled “A Climate of Fear: An Empirical Report on the Suppression of Speech on Palestine in Australia.” The latter mentioned report highlights experiences of anti-Palestinian racism on campuses: “One academic staff member …, despite teaching criminology, was ‘advised to avoid the topic of Palestine’. Another, who teaches international law, was ‘told directly not to talk about Palestine.’”

Universities should be places of critical inquiry, not political enforcement. The integrity of universities must be upheld. Anti-racism policies must not be used to suppress political speech or activism. We call on universities to reject the Universities Australia and IHRA definitions of antisemitism as divisive and repressive to academic and intellectual freedom.

Universities must support the national union and staff response calling on VCs, Universities Australia (UA), and TEQSA to protect intellectual freedom and responsibility while genuinely tackling racism.

We request the opportunity to meet with you to discuss more effective and legally sound anti-racism and dehumanisation frameworks that are best placed to genuinely address racism on campus.

We would appreciate a response to this request and the concerns raised, so we can work to reduce all forms of bigotry and discrimination on campus and in broader society together.