Summary of Cases
Below are the submitted overviews of the cases from either side of the referendum question. You can read the full case by using the links below the table.
| Cases for 'Yes' to reject IHRA |
Cases for 'No' to not reject IHRA |
- We strongly oppose all forms of antisemitism.
- The IHRA definition opposes freedom of speech by potentially accusing Anti-Zionists (people who oppose the State of Israel) of antisemitism (Jew hatred)
- 7 of 11 of the IHRA examples of antisemitism relate to Israel.
- There are existing laws and University policies that deal with antisemitism. The IHRA definition adds nothing to existing policies.
- There are numerous instances where the IHRA definition has been weaponised to silence criticism of Israel.
- We instead propose that the University works with Jewish students and staff to better investigate and tackle antisemitism at City.
|
- The IHRA is recognised by every party in the UK Parliament, over 60% of universities, and ~50 other countries.
- The IHRA is the Jewish community’s definition of Antisemitism, made by Jewish scholars and Holocaust survivors.
- We believe any minority groups have the right to define their own oppression.
- This definition has nothing to do with limiting the freedoms of activists. It is about the protection of Jewish people from Antisemitism.
- This definition does not change that: criticism of the State of Israel is not antisemitic.
- This definition allows for Antisemitism to be properly recognised, allowing it to be properly addressed.
|
Submitted Cases
Both campaign teams were asked to submit a case in writing that will appear on the voting screen once open. You can find their submitted cases here: