The National Forum on Antisemitism and Mixed Messages
- ALCCA Staff
- Mar 9
- 5 min read
Updated: 4 days ago
On Thursday, March 6, 2025 the National Forum on Antisemitism took place in Ottawa. Organized by the Liberal federal government, it brought together 225-250 representatives of the federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments, and community representatives, including over 30 representatives of ALCCA and its member organizations. Government and law enforcement officials met in closed session.
They also participated in two plenary panels alongside two community representatives, ALCCA's Chair Mark Sandler and CIJA's acting CEO, Noah Shack. Media were only permitted to be present for the opening and closing speeches of several federal Ministers and the Prime Minister of Canada, and for the government press conference that followed. The Hon. Irwin Cotler delivered the keynote address.
Key Discussions and Challenges
Many officials spoke about the scourge of antisemitism, some (particularly Minister Rachel Bendayan) from a highly personal perspective, and the need to respond to it. Some even acknowledged the deficiencies in their responses to date. Others, such as Vaughan Mayor Steven Del Duca and Ottawa Police Chief Eric Stubbs, and the local hate-crime prosecutor, Moiz Karimjee, were justifiably recognized by community attendees for their leadership.
Sandler challenged government and police by speaking constructively, but candidly about deficiencies in policing and the failure of governments to act. He told them that they must appreciate that for many community members and organizations, the real issue is a lack of political will to act. They must understand that society is paying too heavy a price when hate speech is normalized and hate-motivated crimes are committed with impunity.
He listed the types of activities that do not amount to protected speech, and said they must be called out by all governments and law enforcement for what they are: wilful promotion of hatred, public incitement of hatred, criminal intimidation (that specifically addresses the blocking of roads and highways), mischief (not only involving vandalism but interference with the lawful use and enjoyment of property), and unlawful assembly depending on the circumstances of each case.
Strengthening Law Enforcement and Legal Responses
In a Discussion Paper prepared for the Forum, Sandler outlined the steps that must be taken by police and governments at each level. He spoke about how many officers are unfamiliar with the full range of criminal measures and municipal bylaws available to combat hate. Their training must include concrete case scenarios to enable them to apply the law to situations they face. Similar training must be provided for prosecutors, particularly prosecutors dedicated to hate-motivated cases, who must work closely with law enforcement to ensure consistency of approach, and a joint commitment to address extremism through the criminal law.
Sandler also emphasized the importance of education for police and prosecutors on antisemitism. He said, however, that such education is counterproductive if it avoids discussion of contemporary antisemitism, that is, demonizing Jews merely because they support the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. He emphasized that police and prosecutors must understand that substituting “Zionist” for “Jew” does not immunize protestors from any criminal accountability, regardless of context or circumstances. They must distinguish between the full latitude to be given to criticism of Israel (whether merited or not) and criminal speech that unequivocally demonizes all Zionists (and therefore 91% of Jews) and all Israelis without distinction or that calls for their destruction. Hatred based on religion and national origin are both addressed under our Criminal Code.
Deborah Lyons, Canada’s Special Envoy for Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism, told those assembled that the time for confusion and uncertainty has passed. The IHRA definition of antisemitism has been adopted by 43 countries, including Canada. The accompanying Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition explains how it should be used effectively by all levels of government, institutions, schools, and law enforcement to combat antisemitism. This has nothing to do with asking the police to weigh in on political disputes. It has everything to do with protecting the Jewish community and its allies from hatred based on their core identities, including their support for the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish homeland.
Government Commitments and Policy Concerns
Read the federal government’s commitments, including financial, that followed the Forum.
Community representatives at the Forum recognized that these commitments were severely tempered by the uncertainty over the next federal government. They questioned the extent to which these commitments will survive the next election. In any event, as everyone acknowledged, these pledges only represented a starting point. Perhaps the greatest importance of the Forum was to promote networking and many conversations that took place between community organizations, law enforcement agencies across the country, and many government officials.
But there was a shadow over the Forum that did not go unnoticed in the impromptu discussions taking place. The Prime Minister said he is a Zionist and we cannot normalize treating Zionism as a pejorative term. However, shortly before the Forum was held, the Canadian Guide to Understanding and Combatting Islamophobia was released by the Federal government.
The Guide was led by the Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, Almira Elghawaby. Much of it is unproblematic. But it devotes a section to anti-Palestinian racism (APR) noting that, in Canada, the understanding of APR is growing, with initiatives like the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association’s 2022 framework. It also states that “some school boards have also developed or are in the process of developing their own definitions of anti-Palestinian racism to address this issue and its harmful effects.”
These passages are footnoted to include, among other things, the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association’s report that defines APR in a way that makes all Zionists racists. For example, it claims that those who “fail to acknowledge Palestinians as an Indigenous people with a collective identity, belonging and rights in relation to occupied and historic Palestine” are racists. We also know that there is a call for filmmakers on Instagram respecting a film project on anti-Palestinian racism. It appears to be sponsored by the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association, the authors of the troubling definition of APR discussed above and funded by the Government of Canada (Employment and Social Development Canada).
A Call for Consistent Policies
No one should condone or permit discrimination against Palestinians because they are Palestinian, against Arabs because they are Arabs, or against Muslims because they are Muslim. Nor should anyone discriminate against those who wish to express “pro-Palestinian” views or criticize Israel in the same way that other countries are subjected to criticism. The IHRA definition of antisemitism and its illustrations make that clear.
However, the federal government cannot have it both ways. Issuing a guide that incorporates by reference a definition of APR that demonizes all Zionists and Israelis is incompatible with what the Prime Minister told those assembled at the Forum, and incompatible with true Canadian values. If the Canadian government truly wishes to show its commitment to combatting antisemitism, it should immediately withdraw the objectionable passages of the Guide to Combatting Islamophobia and reconfirm its commitment that Zionists and Israeli-Canadians will not be demonized for their beliefs.