Markets 
Updated ,first published
Antisemitism adviser and former chief scientist Alan Finkel has raised doubts about whether students found guilty of misconduct should enjoy ongoing anonymity.
The Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion heard on Monday that University of Melbourne physics professor Steven Prawer, whose office was invaded in 2024 by 20 masked and chanting protesters, had never been told the identities of the ringleaders.
Four students were found guilty of misconduct and suspended from the university, but Prawer said he did not know who they were, and was in fear that he might unknowingly encounter them on campus.
Probed on the question by the commissioner, Virginia Bell, Finkel said: “I do feel that the cloak of secrecy across our community, not just in universities, is possibly overused, especially if somebody has been found to have breached a code.
“It’s important not to overdo that.”
However, he acknowledged it was complicated – “especially in the case of somebody who’s a young adult who’s possibly just being exuberant and stepped over a line and has their whole life ahead of them”.
On the other hand, annual reporting by universities of de-identified information about complaints was a “no-brainer”, Finkel said.
Asked about Prawer’s case earlier this week, University of Melbourne vice chancellor Glyn Davis said keeping the students’ names secret had been “a difficult, on-balance decision” by the university.
After a week of evidence at the royal commission about how the universities had each handled the student encampments in 2024 and accusations of antisemitism, David Slucki, director of the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, said he felt “really sorry” for vice chancellors.
The Monash University professor told the commission that trying to distinguish antisemitism from legitimate political criticism of Israel and its actions was not easy.
“For many people, they say, ‘Well, Zionism is Judaism to me’, and then other people … say, ‘Zionism isn’t Judaism’, and [vice chancellors] are looking at that, thinking, ‘How do I navigate this tension?’”
Slucki, who helped develop Australian universities’ definition of anti-Jewish hatred, said antisemitism was a symptom of broader polarisation in society fuelled by social media “rage”.
After two vice chancellors apologised at the royal commission for failings during campus encampments in 2024, Slucki told the commission his group had developed a course on antisemitism that had already trained 1700 university leaders.
“One thing I say at the beginning of every training is we all watch the violence and the events in the Middle East … with a great deal of distress, and much of the anger, trauma that we see comes from a place of hurt,” he said.
This was “true for Jewish staff and students who feel traumatised by October 7, 2023; it’s true for Palestinian and Muslim staff and students who are also traumatised by what they’re witnessing on a daily basis”.
“We don’t think it should be an either-or proposition,” Slucki said.
“If we’re only solving for antisemitism, we’re not solving antisemitism.”
Slucki told commissioner Virginia Bell that universities’ job was made harder by social media algorithms.
“I think about the student who, by the time they’ve arrived in a classroom at, say, 10am … they’ve consumed so much information,” Slucki said.
“Everything they’re reading on their social media feeds … is designed to generate rage, anger and hostility, and so students come onto our campuses … they’re often heightened.”
The consequence was “a kind of all-or-nothing thinking”, Slucki said.
“It’s not only that we disagree, but when we disagree with someone, we see them as wrong and bad or evil”.
Slucki was a key academic author of the Universities Australia definition of antisemitism, which was adopted by universities nationwide after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, and that country’s war on Gaza.
He told the commission that definitions and policies were important, but “you don’t legislate your way out of social discord”. Cultural change at universities was necessary.
He said part of this was understanding how Jewish Australians had been raised by Holocaust survivors. These were traumatised people, which was “a really powerful factor in why people are hypersensitive about antisemitism”.
He said university leaders haven’t always known what’s causing the “anxiety, the fear, the concern that’s coming their way”.
He also emphasised that trauma and discrimination were not just a matter for Jewish Australians.
“We think it’s really important that there’s more of this kind of work, not just from us, but training on Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism and racism directed towards First Nations people as well,” he said.
Dr Mary Russell, chief executive of the Commonwealth regulator the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, told the royal commission she had become concerned about antisemitism on campuses during the encampment era in mid-2024.
There was particular concern about the infiltration of “outside actors” onto campuses, she said, because when they arrived, dialogue between protesters and universities often ended, leading to “much more heated, aggressive, and … personalised [expressions] against Jewish students and Jewish staff”.
Russell acknowledged that at that time, universities had been “very reluctant to make a call” about what constituted antisemitism because they did not really understand it.
In evidence on Wednesday, University of NSW vice chancellor Attila Brungs said they had three definitions of antisemitism on their books.
Russell told the commission: “Prior to discussion this week, I had not contemplated that universities might use multiple definitions.”
“Our expectation is that universities need to be able to very clearly set out what is acceptable and unacceptable.” The regulator intended to formulate a statement of regulatory expectation to this effect.
The vice chancellors of the ANU and Sydney University apologised this week for some of their actions during the encampments, and had since introduced education programs, changed rules to ban camping, and restricted the posting of graffiti and posters.
Monash University vice chancellor Sharon Pickering told the commission she had moved more strongly against the protests as soon as activists posted on social media that Zionists were not welcome on campus. She said that statement was not simply defensible free speech, but would cause offence and harm.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Michael Bachelard is a senior writer and former deputy editor and investigations editor of The Age. He has worked in Canberra, Melbourne and Jakarta, has written two books and won multiple awards for journalism, including the Gold Walkley.Connect via X or email.From our partners
Read the full article here
