Anti-Semitism just part of much wider sickness

Special envoy Jillian Segal’s plan to deal with anti-Semitism won’t work unless the community understands she is dealing with a sickness which affects everyone and not just Jews.

Professor Jillian Segal with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Thursday. Picture: Thomas Lisson

Jillian Segal’s plan for dealing with anti-Semitism has one big vulnerability: it will not work unless the community understands that she is dealing with a sickness that affects everyone, not just Jews.

It is simply inaccurate to view anti-Semitism as a problem for one community. It is an attack on fundamental principles of the rule of law that underpin Australian democracy.

If those principles are incapable of defending Australians who happen to be Jews, they are incapable of defending the rest of us.

Self-interest, not empathy, means we all have a stake in the success of Segal’s plan.

What has happened to Jews in this country since the terror attacks on Israel has already raised doubts about the health of two critically important principles of the rule of law.

The first is equality before the law – that the law will be enforced against everyone, regardless of background.

For almost two years Jews have been on the receiving end of public displays of racism, intimidation and violence that has been undertaken with relative impunity.

Yes, there have been some arrests but police have been slow to act and parliaments, particularly the NSW parliament, have made some questionable decisions.

Why, for example, does this year’s Crimes Amendment (Inciting Racial Hatred) Act in NSW contain an exemption for hate preachers?

This Act was ostensibly designed to suppress hate speech but it contains a loophole that protects incitement of racial hatred if it draws on a religious text or even makes reference to a religious text.

Segal’s report gives notice that, with the support of government, she will review and where appropriate strengthen federal, state and territory legislation addressing anti-Semitic, hateful or intimidating conduct. That means the NSW parliament might need to rethink the exemption for hate preachers that is outlined in section 93ZAA(2) of that statute.

The second principle that has come under attack is just as important: that everyone is entitled to the protection of the law, regardless of background.

It is the role of the government – federal and state – to protect the community by ensuring the law is capable of addressing the evolving nature of threats to public safety.

It’s worth considering whether anyone, not just Jews, would consider the laws of this country are equal to that task.

Just last month, a poll undertaken for my organisation, the Rule of Law Education Centre, found fewer than half of all Australians – just 47 per cent – believe today’s legal system is providing equal treatment for everyone regardless of background.

In Victoria, the focus of last weekend’s anti-Semitic rampage, just 40 per cent of those polled believe the legal system is delivering equal treatment regardless of background.

What this suggests is that most people in this country have no appetite for the kind of two-tier policing that blighted the British response to gang rapes by Pakistani grooming gangs.

Segal is right to spend much of her report focusing on the need for education, institutional accountability and university reform. But in order to be truly effective, these initiatives need to be clear about the true nature of anti-Semitism: It is an attack on the principles of the rule of law and is therefore an attack that threatens all of us.

The same approach might also strengthen Segal’s plan to review immigration and citizenship policies to ensure officials screen applicants for extremist views, including anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism needs to be recognised by immigration officials as evidence of an inability to comprehend the principles that underpin the rule of law which is fundamental to Australia’s way of life.

A small weakness in Segal’s report is its assertion that “the surge in anti-Semitism in the last 18 months is driven by extremist ideologies both online and offline”.

This, of course, is true. But with the greatest respect, it’s only part of the explanation.

As a community we need to accept that the blame for anti-Semitism is not limited to radicalised thugs or even the hate preachers who infest social media.

For almost two years, we have seen growing evidence of a catastrophic and long-term failure of public policy on civic education – not just for would-be migrants, but for young Australians. At the heart of that failure is a refusal to accept that respect for the rule of law and the principles that underpin democracy do not come naturally – particularly for those who have grown up in countries with different traditions.

Australian democracy and the rule of law are the result of 800 years of painful and heroic development. It is a priceless heritage.

By failing to drive home the importance of that heritage state and federal governments have abandoned the playing field, leaving a vacuum for extremists and others who detest our liberties.

If anyone should take the blame for the current disaster it is earlier generations of politicians who are responsible for giving migrants and young Australians just a bare-bones understanding of civics, the rule of law and Australian values.

Before Segal was appointed special envoy to combat anti-Semitism she had been a lawyer of substance.

She would know that without the rule of law – and the principles underpinning this doctrine – democracy would be a mere charade.

Towards the end of her report she says as much.

“The measures outlined in this plan by the special envoy go beyond protecting a single community; they uphold our shared Australian values of democracy, equity and mutual respect,” she writes.

Chris Merritt is vice-president of the Rule of Law Institute of Australia and the Rule of Law Education Centre.