Ossip cross-examination draws stern criticism

The cross-examination of NSW Jewish Board of Deputies president David Ossip by lawyers for two Palestinian advocacy groups last week drew criticism from political leaders and community figures, while Commissioner Virginia Bell defended the questioning on grounds of procedural fairness.

Ossip gave evidence last Tuesday about the evening of October 9, 2023, when an anti-Israel rally moved through Sydney’s CBD to the Opera House, which he described as “a scene of international disgrace and infamy”.

The commission granted limited leave to lawyers representing the Palestine Action Group (PAG) and the Australia Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN) to put questions to him.

PAG counsel Dominic Toomey SC put to Ossip that Israeli airstrikes on Gaza had begun on the evening of October 7, 2023, questioning whether the rally could be divorced from those events.

Ossip rejected the premise: “This is a Royal Commission on antisemitism … I’m a bit confused as to why we’re getting caught up in the minutiae of the timeline of a foreign military operation.”

Meanwhile, Ragni Mathur SC acting for APAN probed Ossip on whether Palestinians had also suffered psychological trauma. Ossip said he felt empathy for innocent Palestinians but maintained that helping organise a rally “at a time when such grievous acts of violence were being committed against Israeli civilians … showed a lack of sensitivity”.

NSW Premier Chris Minns told News24 the line of questioning was “disappointing” and “doesn’t reflect the purpose of these hearings”. Liberal Senator James Paterson called on the commission to apologise to Ossip, saying cross-examining “an Australian Jew about the actions of the Israeli government is an abuse of the process”.

Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-CEO Alex Ryvchin said the groups had “normalised egregious lies of genocide and child-killing”, while Michael Britvan, whose 10-year-old daughter Matilda was killed in the Bondi massacre, said he struggled to understand why the groups could use the commission “to ask questions that shift the focus away from the antisemitism that led to it”.

Bell addressed the matter last Wednesday, saying Mathur had been granted only limited leave, confined to a single paragraph of Ossip’s statement.

“She was granted leave to do that because procedural fairness, a concept familiar to lawyers but perhaps not more widely understood, demanded it,” Bell said.

The commissioner also revealed that Mathur had received “a series of truly abusive, Islamophobic emails” after a media interview in which a prominent Jewish community member said counsel had “endeavoured to hijack the Royal Commission” through “clickbait theatrics and gratuitous slurs against Israel”.

Bell rejected that characterisation, saying Mathur had appeared for an organisation whose interests were directly affected because its representatives had been the subject of trenchant criticism.

She drew a parallel between the abuse of counsel and the antisemitic attacks directed at Jewish witnesses.

“Counsel appearing for groups before this Royal Commission should no more be the subject of Islamophobic or other attacks than should members of the Jewish community,” she said.