NZ Jewish Council clarifies antisemitism strategy call amid free speech concerns

A public exchange between the New Zealand Jewish Council and the Free Speech Union has drawn attention to the difficult balance between countering rising antisemitism and preserving freedom of expression in New Zealand’s public institutions.

The conversation began with a joint statement released on 11 July by the New Zealand Jewish Council (NZJC) and the Holocaust Centre of New Zealand, urging the Government to adopt a national strategy to combat antisemitism. Their call was prompted by Australia’s newly announced plan, which includes a wide-ranging approach across education, government, and public institutions, along with potential consequences for entities that fail to adequately address antisemitism.

In their statement, the NZJC and Holocaust Centre warned that antisemitism is increasingly visible in New Zealand, particularly in universities, where Jewish students report feeling isolated, intimidated, and unable to express their identity safely. They stressed the need for a coordinated, principled government response, modelled on Australia’s example.

However, on 14 July, the Free Speech Union (FSU) issued a press release raising concern that such a strategy might amount to “overreach,” suggesting it could lead to censorship or create a chilling effect on political discussion, particularly around the Israel–Palestine conflict.

In response, the NZ Jewish Council released a follow-up statement on 16 July, firmly rejecting suggestions that it was calling for censorship or the criminalisation of opinion.

“We have not called for restrictions on free speech,” the Council stated. “We are not seeking to silence criticism of Israel or advocacy for Palestinian rights… Our call was, and remains, for accountability when rhetoric becomes harassment, exclusion and incitement.”

The Council reiterated that its appeal to government was grounded in democratic values and a desire to ensure that public institutions — especially universities — are safe and inclusive for all students.

“It is not ‘censorship’ to expect that our public institutions uphold basic standards of safety, respect, and inclusion. It is responsible governance.”

The statement emphasised that the Council has maintained a consistent position on hate speech laws and supports robust public debate, including criticism of Israel, so long as it does not cross the line into antisemitic abuse or incitement.

The Free Speech Union has said it welcomes continued dialogue and encourages combating bigotry through open discourse rather than punitive measures.

While the two organisations may differ in emphasis, both appear to agree that antisemitism is a growing concern and that public institutions have a role to play in addressing it. The question now is how best to do so — through improved education, institutional accountability, or broader cultural engagement — without undermining core democratic freedoms.

As the conversation continues, the New Zealand Government has yet to signal whether it will pursue a national antisemitism strategy similar to Australia’s. But calls for a more structured response are gaining momentum.

 

Get J-WIRE on WhatsApp. Join the channel