Major review of antisemitism in education faces legal challenge over IHRA recommendation

A major government-backed review of antisemitism in education is facing a legal challenge over its recommendation that schools and colleges in England formally adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. The review, conducted by former top Department for Education (DfE) civil servant Sir David Bell, was released last month and made 27 key recommendations, all of which have been accepted by ministers.

Among them were calls for all schools to observe Holocaust Memorial Day, to expand teaching about Judaism and Jews beyond Holocaust studies, and to carefully consider the propriety of political expression, particularly by staff, around the conflict in the Middle East. However, the recommendation to adopt the IHRA definition, which is already formally recognised by government, prompted backlash from pro-Palestine commentators, who argued that it would limit free debate around Israel and Zionism.

This has been a long-standing argument among critics of the definition, particularly focused on its provision listing the denial of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination, comparison of contemporary Israeli policies to those of the Nazis, and the suggestion that Israel’s establishment was an inherently racist endeavour as examples of contemporary antisemitism. Now, though, legal advocacy group the Good Law Project (GLP) has confirmed it had sent a pre-action protocol letter to the DfE, which formally notifies the department of its intention to file a legal challenge.

The GLP said its challenge was intended to “protect the space to advance vigorous criticisms of Israel’s appalling actions”. The GLP’s executive director, Jolyon Maugham, added: “It is not merely important to protect the space to advance vigorous criticisms of Israel’s appalling actions – we think it is necessary in a moral society.” It comes after a number of commentators, including Owen Jones, questioned the methodology of Sir David’s report, suggesting that its findings on the prevalence of antisemitism in schools and colleges had been based on a “tiny” and unrepresentative sample.

“It is riddled with factual errors, contradictions and distortions of evidence and research,” added Jones. Sir David responded to those criticisms in an exclusive JC op-ed, saying: “No single statistic, survey or testimony can give us a complete picture of an issue as complex as antisemitism in education. That is precisely why the review considered both statistic-based evidence, and personal testimonies.” Asked to comment on the GLP’s legal challenge, a DfE spokesperson said: “Antisemitism is a growing problem across society, including in our schools and colleges, and Jewish children and staff should never face hatred or prejudice in education.

“That is why we have accepted all 27 of Sir David Bell’s recommendations and are acting on them, including encouraging schools and colleges to adopt the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. “The IHRA definition has been adopted by 47 countries and countless public bodies and can provide a practical framework for teachers and pupils, and help give greater clarity on how to identify and tackle antisemitism wherever it occurs.”