UCUE IHRA Working Group
Following the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism by the University of Edinburgh at its University Executive Meeting in July 2020, the IHRA Working Group was set up via a motion passed at a General Meeting of UCU Edinburgh on 10 June 2021.
The motion specifically resolved to:
Establish a dedicated working group, specifically to campaign for the University to reverse its adoption of the IHRA definition.
Invite colleagues from other UCU branches and outside UCU to speak about their campaigns against adopting the IHRA.
Seek clarification from University management on the following:
How was the IHRA decision passed, why did it not go to Senate, who was consulted, and why were experts whose teaching/research could conceivably be impacted by the IHRA definition not consulted?
How is antisemitic intent determined? Who defines it, who sits on the committee that decides this, and what is the procedure to oppose accusations of antisemitic intent based on the IHRA definition?
What does the “case by case approach” mentioned by the University in its response to its experts mean in practice? How would this approach work in cases of scholars, students, or guests critical of Israel’s state racist policies?
On 20 January 2022, UCU Edinburgh issued a public letter to the Principal, endorsed by Edinburgh Staff BAME Network, Edinburgh Race Equality Network (EREN) Committee and UncoverEd, asking that a dialogue be initiated to address these issues. The following month the Principal replied, agreeing to establish a Task and Finish Group (TFG) to be headed by the Chair of the University Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) Committee, Prof Sarah Cunningham-Burley, ‘to review the IHRA examples and guidance and propose, if appropriate, alternative examples and guidance that support the University’s commitment to antisemitism, academic freedom and freedom of expression’. The membership of the group was to include ‘those with relevant academic expertise, those engaged in our anti-racist work and those from our Jewish staff and student communities’ and it was expected to report back to the University Executive Committee by the summer of 2022 with recommendations.
Invitations to join the TFG were in fact not issued until November 2022. Of those who signed the original UCU public letter of January 2022, only EREN were formally invited to attend. Despite the role that its letter played in precipitating the formation of the TFG and repeated requests to attend, UCU was not formally included in the first meeting although some members of its IHRA Working Group attended in different capacities.
The first TFG meeting was held on 26 January 2023 and attended by about 20 people where questions were raised about the lack of UCU and Staff BAME representation, and about the original process taken by the University in adopting the definition in the first place. The discussion showed that many shared the view that there were some basic difficulties with the IHRA definition, even if their perspective on the problems it raised varied considerably.
Following further representation to the EDI Chair, UCUE was invited to attend the second TFG meeting which took place on 10 May 2023 and again involved representation from various groups, both staff and student. The discussion, conducted as a serious of personal statements, again revolved around the highlighting of concerns by various parties on issues of antisemitism and the problems that the IHRA definition raises for academic staff and for many students. The chair recognised in principle that there should have been greater consultation on the adoption of the IHRA. There was no real attempt to resolve any of these difficulties but it was understood that ongoing meetings would address this.
In July, the Head of the Task and Finish Group, Prof Sarah Cunningham-Burley, contacted members of the informing them of her decision without consultation to dissolve the group stating ‘…it seems clear that we are not going to easily achieve any consensus about the IHRA definition and its guidance, such that working with and around the examples – what the Task and Finish group was set up to do - does not seem to be a solution to concerns raised about the definition.’
Responses by UCUE as well as other group members to Prof Cunningham-Burley expressed their disappointment in the manner of the decision and dissatisfaction with the process generally. UCU also wrote to Peter Mathieson calling for a reconsideration of this decision and has recently received a reply recognising ‘the need to continue to have discussions’. We currently wait to hear from Prof Cunningham-Burley as to what form these discussions will take.
UCUE will continue to press for the University for an explanation for the lack of consultation in the process of its adoption of the IHRA definition, for clarification on how it will be used to assess accusations of antisemitism, but most importantly, will highlight the chilling effect that accusations employing the IHRA have created for those teaching and conducting research on matters to do with Israel/Palestine. The last has been amply demonstrated through a collection of testimonies from academic staff and students and the discriminatory implications of the IHRA definition cogently argued in a legal paper of the European Legal Services Centre (https://www.brismes.ac.uk/news/press-release-new-report-highlights-major-free-speech-issues-in-uk-universities).
18 Sept 2023