No Australian university properly defines antisemitism

An independent assessment of Australian universities has found a sector-wide failure to adopt an effective definition of antisemitism, the foundation on which all other anti-hate measures depend.

Emeritus Professor Greg Craven, appointed as Independent Assessor by Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism Jillian Segal, concluded no Australian university met the definitional requirements of the University Report Card process.

“No Australian university assessed met the definitional requirements of the Report Card. Without a clear, adopted, and enforceable definition of antisemitism, efforts to combat hatred on campus are fundamentally compromised,” Professor Craven said on Wednesday.

The finding meant the Report Card process, which was intended to assess universities across four priority areas – definition of antisemitism, policy settings, complaints processes, and antisemitism training – was confined to examining the definition issue alone.

“Without such a basal definition as a criterion for judgement, it is impossible to assess such operational matters as dispute and complaint handling and programs to cultivate awareness of antisemitism,” Professor Craven wrote in his 62-page sectoral assessment.

The report found that while many universities had endorsed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) or Universities Australia definitions of antisemitism, these endorsements were largely symbolic, lacking binding force or operational effect.

Professor Craven identified 11 categories of failure, including “symbolic definition only”, where universities passed non-binding resolutions; “obscurity”, where purported definitions were lost in complex documentation; and “antisemitism absorbed into racism”, where the specific nature of antisemitism was subsumed into general discrimination policies.

“Australian universities as a group have failed to adopt a definition of antisemitism,” he wrote. “With relatively few though significant exceptions, universities have indeed recited the IHRA or UA definitions, orally, in writing, or both. But in no case has either been embedded in its own right as a fundamental conceptual and binding principle of a university’s character.”

Segal said the findings were deeply concerning.

“I remain convinced that the adoption of a definition of antisemitism is absolutely essential for combatting antisemitism. No university can develop adequate policies and procedures, including complaints procedures, for dealing with antisemitism if it cannot first define what its policies and procedures are intended to eliminate,” she said.

“I accept Professor Craven’s conclusion that it is inappropriate to assess progress in relation to the other priorities in the absence of a definition. I also accept his conclusion that the failure to adopt a definition needs to be understood as a sector-wide systemic failure.”

Executive Council of Australian Jewry president Daniel Aghion said the findings were “deeply dispiriting”.

“It is deeply dispiriting that universities’ failure to adopt a definition of antisemitism is symptomatic of the ‘sectoral failure’ of universities in living up to their duty of care to staff and students who have been negatively impacted by greatly increased levels of antisemitism that have been well-documented at their universities,” he said.

The Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism said it was disappointed but not surprised by the findings.

“To be effective the definition must be clear and comprehensive, and affirmatively adopted and embedded within an institution’s controlling documents and its rules and policy framework and operations,” said 5A CEO Alisa Pincus.

The Group of Eight said it took the report seriously and had already established an independent expert committee to combat antisemitism.

“Go8 universities have been clear: antisemitism, racism and hate have no place in our institutions. Where students or staff experience harm, the response must be immediate, visible and decisive,” the Group of Eight said in a statement.

The report highlighted several underlying reasons for the failure, including universities not realising the seriousness of antisemitism in Australia until the December 14, 2025 Bondi massacre; failure to see Jews as a “category” in need of protection; limited regulatory and drafting skills; and time constraints.

Professor Craven noted five universities showing signs of progress: the University of Canberra, Swinburne University of Technology, Southern Cross University, the University of Southern Queensland, and Charles Darwin University.

The report recommended universities be given a further opportunity to adopt proper definitions, with Segal writing to all 38 university vice chancellors asking them to send the Independent Assessor a detailed timetable for adopting and operationalising a definition by August 31.

The findings come as the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion concluded its first public hearing block, hearing testimony about the experiences of Jewish Australians since October 7, 2023.