So the European Commission put out a new handbook to promote use of #IHRA definition of antisemitism across a range of policy areas & spheres of society.

This despite ever-growing concern & body of serious, well argued criticism, incl from leading antisemitism experts... /1 https://twitter.com/kschnurbein/status/1347515931564630016

... and from the author of the definition himself . New opeds, expert papers & open letters with concerns about the definition, impact on free speech & muddling of the understanding of antisemitism are appearing almost every day. /2 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/13/antisemitism-executive-order-trump-chilling-effect

Yet the handbook doesn’t even acknowledge existence of such concerns.

Compare that with recent opinion by an official European body of rights experts that is broadly pro-IHRA but does at least clearly acknowledge the concerns and warns against misuse. /3 https://twitter.com/ECRI_CoE/status/1334166763785891841

In contrast, the EC-published handbook is tone-deaf to the criticisms.

Remarkable for EC to act in such one-sided manner on a matter of substantial public debate and controversy - esp given that fundamental issues like free speech are at stake. /4

Also noteworthy: Handbook is actually written by a German expert group - folks who seem to be strong supporters of the IHRA def. Fine print says it only represents authors’ views and not the EC’s - but it’s published by the EC with its logo and all. So which is it? /5

Furthermore: Handbook promotes the IHRA definition including all the examples - and furthers their interpretation. It’s supposedly a follow-up to 2018 Council declaration that promotes the IHRA def. But that declaration explicitly didn’t include the examples... /6

...which were in fact struck out from the draft after member state opposition.It looks like EC now bringing them back via backdoor. /7 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12116-2018-REV-1/en/pdf

No matter where u stand on IHRA def, this is a very peculiar way of EU policymaking. (Contrary to certain perceptions of Brussels, EC policymkg is usually quite consultative & inclusive.)

Any comment from the EC's @kschnurbein or others welcome. /8

Enthusiastic response from the Israeli govt whis has been heavily promoting the IHRA def is not surprising /9 https://twitter.com/LiorHaiat/status/1348339565011075074

All this as the departing Trump admin leaves a legacy of weaponising the IHRA def to stigmatise & silence critics of Israel and even just of settlements - while itself unleashing wave of hardcore right-wing antisemitism in the US. /10

I can’t believe the EC wouldn't be aware of all the thoughtful criticisms of the IHRA def that are totally unaddressed in the handbook - but ok, here's one recent list. /11 https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/whos-against-adopting-the-ihra-antisemitism-definition/

Latest: new 100+p report of Univ. College London's WG on Racism & Prejudice concludes:

"[T]he IHRA working definition of antisemitism is not fit for purpose in a university setting".

Which is exactly one of the things the handbook strongly promotes. /END https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ucu/sites/ucu/files/wg-racism-and-prejudice-report.pdf