Skip to content

IHRA working definition abused again

JVL Introduction

In what we can only read as a case of political censorship a serving police officer has been sacked for expressing her opinions on Gaza on a private online social group.

Her views, discussed in the article below, are ones we suspect all our readers will regard as perfectly reasonable statements of opinion.

It is hard to read the judgment as anything other than a clear violation of the officer’s rights to free speech under Article 10.

Contrast this judgment with that of Nov 2023 against DS Victoria Teagle, for example, who was only given a final written warning despite disciplinary panel finding her guilty of gross misconduct for sending racist messages.

Why the harsh treatment? Clearly because it was about Gaza.

Particularly alarming was the uncritical use of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism by the tribunal.

“The Panel noted that within the IHRA working definition there are contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life and found the following example to be relevant in relation to this one post: the drawing of comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” (para 48)

The offending word in this post were these: “a classic case of the abused becomes the abuser… no?”

The Panel, ignoring the IHRA’s own injunction about “taking into account the context”, drew the bizarre conclusion that “on the balance of probabilities the post itself is antisemitic, whether or not the Officer had appreciated at the time it would be considered so”.

You can read the full judgment here.

RK

This article was originally published by the Independent on Mon 2 Feb 2026. Read the original here.

“Met detective sergeant sacked over ‘antisemitic’ post about Gaza

Rebecca Collens drew parallels between Nazi Germany and conditions in Palestine

Loading article text…

Comments are now closed.