Ok in the Senate to the Anti-Semitism bill, clash over the IHRA declaration

‘Green disc’ of the Senate, with 105Yes24 nos and 21 abstentions, to the bill which contains measures to combatantisemitism. The measure now passes to the House for consideration. Not without controversy despite the majority having ‘refined’ the text, meeting some of the opposition’s requests. With the Democratic Party that split: 21 followed the line ofsecretariat to abstain while 6 voted in favour. Antonyms isenators di M5e a Avs.

The latter reasoned their negative vote by explaining: “Our disagreement on the law on anti-Semitism is exactly the IHRA statement (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, ed.). It is true that in that statement it is written that criticism of Israel cannot be considered anti-Semitic. But the problem is that in the countries where it was adopted, this statement was exactly used to do the opposite of what he says. On the basis of this declaration a lecture at Oxford University was banned director Ken Loach attended“, said the group leader of the Green and Left Alliance Peppe De Cristofaro, president of the Misto group, in the Chamber at Palazzo Madama.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism

The definition ofantisemitismformulated on 26 May 2016 in the Plenary ofIHRAit reads like this: “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews which can be expressed as hatred of Jews. Verbal and physical displays of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jews or non-Jews and/or their property, towards Jewish community institutions and buildings used for worship”. Then to guide the work of theInternational Holocaust Remembrance Alliancesome are broughtexamplesthe points taken up byanti-Semitism billapproved by the Senate. “The demonstrations may have the State of Israel as their target because it was conceived as a Jewish community. However, criticism of Israel is similar to that of any other country they cannot be considered anti-Semitic“, the document reads.

Contemporary examples of anti-Semitism

Considering the general context, contemporary examples ofantisemitism in public lifein the media, in schools, in the workplace and in the religious sphere include (but are not limited to) the following:

• Incite, support or justify the killing of Jewsor harm against Jews in the name of a radical ideology or extremist religious vision.
• Making mendacious, dehumanizing insinuations, demonizing or stereotyping of Jews as individuals or their power as a collectivity – for example, especially but not exclusively, the myth ofglobal Jewish conspiracyor Jews who control the media, economy, government, or other institutions within a society.
• Accusing the Jews as responsible people of real or imagined crimes committed by a single Jew or a group of Jews, or even by actions committed by non-Jews.
• Denying the fact, the scope, the mechanisms (for example the gas chambers) or the intention ofgenocide of the Jewish peopleat the hands of National Socialist Germany and its followers and accomplices during the Second World War (theHolocaust).
• Accusing the Jews as a people or Israel as a state of having invented the Holocaust or exaggerating its contents.
• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel or to the alleged priorities of Jews in the world than to the interests of their nation.
• Deny Jews the right to self-determinationfor example by arguing that the existence of the State of Israel is an expression of racism.
• Apply double standards towards Israel requiring behavior not expected of or required of any other democratic state.
• Using symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (for example the accusation of deicide or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
• Make comparisons between contemporary Israeli politics and that of the Nazis.
• Hold Jews collectively accountable for the actions of the State of Israel,

Gasparri: with this law we adopt the IHRA declaration

“With this law We adopt the statement of the International Holocaust Remembrance Allianceincluding related indicators that someone wanted to delete. In that statement, in point 7, it is written that Jews cannot be denied the right to self-determination, for example by claiming that the existence of the State of Israel is an expression of racism. Here you are because I gave up, with a view to convergenceto the point of my proposal in which I asked for the criminalization of those who praise the destruction of Israel. It is the same IHRA statement to protect the existence of that State“. This was said by the president of the senators of Forza Italia, Maurizio Gasparri.

The position of the 5 Star Movement

M5s senator Alessandra Maiorino explained in her explanation of vote: “Antisemitism is a hateful form of racism is ancient and combating it is a serious issue that requires serious and solid tools, including regulatory ones. This is not the case with this law proposed by the centre-right majority. We have heard calls to share on their part, but it’s a shame that they refused to work in a select committee which could have been the place to find cohesion on a shared text”, said the senator. Who then placed emphasis on the IHRA statement which, he added, “was born as an operational tool for monitoring anti-Semitism”, so “transforming it into law risks creating interpretative ambiguities and above all, establish censorship through legislation politics. It would have been enough to approve our amendment on the freedom to criticize the state of Israel to clear the field of problems. The majority’s no demonstrates that that ambiguity is intentional. The majority wants it give political cover to the Israeli right of whom she is a friend and who she supported with propaganda and actions”, he concluded.

The satisfaction of the Jewish community of Rome

Celebrate theJewish community of Rome. “It is good and important news that the Senate has approved the bill against anti-Semitism, which is necessary today more than ever. Once it has also been examined by the House, it will become a decisive tool in the fight against anti-Jewish hatred in all its forms. Including hatred towards Israel, bastion of the West and only democracy of the Middle East”. This was underlined by Victor Fadlun, President of the Jewish Community of Rome. “It is positive – he continues – that the text obtained a large majority. What is striking though Liliana Segre’s appeal to unityhas not been accepted by even a minority part of politics and that on the left there has been an attempt to water down the definition of anti-Semitism accepted throughout Europe. Any discussion that aims to obtain a downward compromise on anti-Semitism is disturbing, just as the latest polls say that acts of violence against Italians of the Jewish religion have increased by 225 percent since 2023. Even more so, We thank and appreciate everyone’s positions those who have taken a firm and unambiguous line in Parliament, from the government forces to that part of the left that she refused to ride extremism Pro-Pal”.

The Union of Italian Jewish Communities

Also satisfiedUnion of Italian Jewish Communitieswhich welcomes with satisfaction the outcome of the vote onbill on combating anti-Semitismand adoption ofIHRA operational definitionby the Senate of the Republic, which “represents a win for everyone the components of civil society not only for the Jewish community”.

The provision, we read in a UCEI note, “approved after a long and painful debate in the chamber,it is the result of various parliamentary initiatives by the majority and the oppositionwho were able to find a unitary and synthetic position, represents a complex path, which requiredresponsibility and mediation capacityand which testifies to the awareness of the need to provide the country with oneclear and shared regulatory framework“. “We express appreciation for the effort and collaboration between the various protagonists of the various parties who have taken action with an institutional spirit – continues the UCEI – significant amendments have been approved andthe operational definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance was confirmed as a point of referencealready adopted by numerous countries, including non-European ones, and also considered essential by the institutions of Italian Jewry.Anti-Semitism is not an issue that concerns only Jews: it is a structural poison of our society, a direct threat to democratic principles and civil coexistence. In this process, the UCEI followed the parliamentary process with particular attention, in constant dialogue with the National Coordinator for the fight against anti-Semitism, General Angelosanto, and with the Contemporary Jewish Documentation Center Foundation (CDEC). The convergence recorded today, unfortunately less extensive than hoped for, represents a strong and unequivocal signal: theCountering anti-Jewish hatred is a shared national priority“.

A starting point for civil society

The UCEI considers this “an important starting pointto be combined with other initiatives aimed atraise awareness of all sectors of civil society. When institutions know how to speak with one voice on fundamental values, the whole is strengtheneddemocratic system of the country. While awaiting the final passage in the Chamber, we thank the senators who attended and for their concrete commitment to parliamentary work, the president of the Senate La Russa, the minister Ciriani and the senators Balboni, Delrio, Gasparri, Gelmini, Mieli, MalanPirovano, Romeo and Scalfarotto” he concludes.