The Knesset Should Outlaw Anti-Semitism

The concept of universal jurisdiction allows states to prosecute serious crimes such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, regardless of where they occur or the nationality of the perpetrator. Israel has historically invoked universal jurisdiction, most notably during the trial of Adolf Eichmann. Extending this principle to anti-Semitism acknowledges its global impact and asserts that hatred targeting Jews is not just a domestic issue but a transnational crime against humanity.

In an era where anti-Semitism continues to proliferate, both overtly and insidiously, nations with a vested interest in combating hatred must adopt proactive legal frameworks to protect Jewish communities and promote global accountability. Israel, as the Jewish state, holds a unique moral and legal position to lead this charge. A law outlawing anti-Semitism and employing the principles of universal jurisdiction to prosecute offenders would send a powerful message that hate speech and incitement against Jews will no longer be tolerated anywhere in the world.

Anti-Semitism transcends borders, appearing in various guises from conspiracy theories to outright violence. It has infected political discourse, social media platforms, and public spaces.

Israel’s role as the Jewish homeland positions it as a moral beacon in the fight against anti-Semitism. While it has laws addressing incitement to violence and hate speech, a comprehensive anti-Semitism law would serve as both a deterrent and a tool for justice. This law would define anti-Semitism clearly, following, for example, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition, and criminalize specific acts of anti-Semitic incitement, discrimination, and violence.

Public figures wield enormous influence, and their statements can perpetuate or normalize anti-Semitic sentiments. Imagine an Israeli court issuing an arrest warrant for public figures like Candace Owens, Kanye West, Roger Waters, or Greta Thunberg, should their actions or rhetoric meet the legal threshold of anti-Semitism under Israeli law. While controversial, such actions would underscore the seriousness with which Israel views anti-Semitic acts and their global ramifications.

For example, if a public figure engages in rhetoric that aligns with the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, such as demonizing Israel as a collective embodiment of evil or perpetuating classic anti-Jewish stereotypes, this could warrant prosecution under the proposed framework. The objective is not to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel or dissenting opinions but to draw a clear line between free speech and hate speech.

Critics might argue that such a law infringes on freedom of speech, but this is a false dichotomy. Democratic societies routinely place limits on speech when it incites violence or hatred. Laws against Holocaust denial, for instance, exist in many European countries and have withstood legal challenges. A balanced Israeli law would distinguish between constructive discourse and incitement, protecting freedoms while combating hate.

By adopting this law, Israel would assert itself as a global leader in the fight against anti-Semitism. It would demonstrate solidarity with Jewish communities worldwide, offering them a legal avenue for justice when local systems fail. Moreover, it would signal to the world that anti-Semitism is not a “Jewish problem” but a universal moral failing that demands a united response.

The proposed Israeli law against anti-Semitism, coupled with universal jurisdiction, is not just a legal framework but a moral statement. It challenges the world to view anti-Semitism as a crime that transcends borders, deserving of the same level of accountability as other crimes against humanity.

Such a law would be bold, controversial, and potentially groundbreaking. In a world where hate is increasingly globalized, the fight against anti-Semitism must be equally global. Israel is uniquely positioned to lead this effort, and in doing so, it can protect Jewish communities, uphold justice, and reaffirm the principles of human dignity and equality.