Have the claims of Labour antisemitism been exaggerated?

The Labour Party has in recent years received very many complaints of antisemitic behaviour by its members. Some of these relate to behaviour that has no place in the Labour party or anywhere else. Others are either distortions of events; or falsify he event by removing context; or exaggerate the incident beyond recognition.

Now that the EHRC Report has been published we are releasing the detailed submission we made in response to the dossier submitted by the JLM.

The JLM had published a partially redacted version of its dossier. We made a detailed analysis of the 200 claims of antisemitism in this document and submitted it to the EHRC in April 2020. We published our executive summary and a number of case studies then. We believe it is helpful to the debate about “exaggeration”  of Labour Party antisemitism to make the full 192-page rebuttal available. We have redacted all names and identifying details as we do not wish either to inflict pain on those falsely accused or to embarrass those making the claims.

We said in our Executive Summary in April:

[A] large swathe of the [JLM] dossier contributes to the construction of the
Labour Party as a dangerous place for Jews, quite contrary to our
experience. In our response we deconstruct it and, in the process, have
observed a variety of faults in the dossier which we summarise here:

*           Much of it is simply rumour and gossip, or unsubstantiated
allegations. Where we have been able to investigate these, we find
remarkably little support for what is alleged to have taken place. It is
sometimes demonstrably wrong.

*           Much of it is interpretation of the IHRA working definition of
Antisemitism or of how Labour party processes did or did not work. We
express reasoned disagreements on many of the conclusions which the JLM
submission chose to draw, in particular its repeated eagerness to interpret
failings (or alleged failings) relating to incidents with no obvious
connection to antisemitism, to antisemitic intent or antisemitic
institutional bias [as evidence of antisemitism].

You can read the full executive summary here

You can read our fuller dossier, too large to post as a downloadable file on this website, here


Links to all JVL statements and other articles on the EHRC report

Comments (9)

  • Sean O’Donoghue says:

    Thanks folks….for all the work you put, This is an excellent riposte. In a court of law it would win hands down, bit in this world turned upside down, it will not have a hearing other than amongst those already committed

  • Simon Dewsbury says:

    This is extremely impressive and looks to be thoroughly evidence based. And a huge amount of work. Thank you.

  • David RICHARDSON says:

    I have just read the executive summary. Very glad you have published this, and your response to the EHRC report, which I am about to read.
    But the summary needs to be proof-read. It contains editing errors.

  • Kath Shaw says:

    Such sterling work. Thank you

  • Harry Law says:

    The number of members expelled from the Labour party in 20018 was 10
    The number of Labour party members expelled in 2019 was 45.
    The total membership around this time was approx 550,000.
    This works out at 0.0001% of the total membership. Jeremy Corbyn said the accusations were exaggerated and Angela Rayner agreed with him and told BBC’s Newsnight she agreed with him… “I believe that the statement around the small numbers and to suggest that it is a small number in the Labour party WHILST THAT MAY BE TRUE is completely unacceptable to not understand the hurt and the distr END. https://skwawkbox.org/2020/10/31/video-rayner-admits-what-corbyn-said-was-true-but-it-was-unacceptable/ Telling the truth in the Labour party is now an expellable offence.
    Corbyn suspended, Rayner not. You could not make this up.

  • marie says:

    YES = they have been exaggerated. I have found, only those who listen to the BBCon news or read biased news, are sucked in by the reports. People like myself, who bother to look at records – and certainly records of JC life – work and affiliations… knows well Antisemitism is not a label we can attribute to him. He is know wide and fare to be honest, and non-discriminating. Trustworthy and Sincere. We presently have a Corrupt Government in the UK, which needs to be investigated, followed by MPs showing up in courts, to defend themselves. If it were possible… I would leave the country – unfortunately I cannot. We no longer have a democracy in the UK, we are heading day by day to increased Dictatorship

  • TeresaGrover says:

    At last the JVL has a voice, for too long the Jewish community was represented by some very doubtful people, who verbally accused many Jewish people as the ” wrong Jews!”
    What upset me was how quick the JLM would not listen to anyone anywhere that critises Israel’s policies on Arpartheid & Genocide of Palestinian people.
    The vicious toxic attack on Mr.Corbyn & others was extreme & put many Labour voters in danger of being called antisemitic where it did not does not exsist. Therefore reading your words JVL warms me gives hope that truth is there to see.
    Exaggeration of hatred IS DANGEROUS, because it deflects from the real antisemitism in Europe.
    I congratulate you all for standing up for the truth, the facts & justice. Thankyou everyone

  • Simon Dewsbury says:

    There are interesting omissions from the JLM dossier. One of the (female) participants in the Panorama programme on the Labour Party mentions being told that ‘Hitler was right …….Hitler did not go far enough’ in the context of her experiences in the Labour Party. As someone apparently connected to JLM, one would have thought that such allegations, already made to an audience of millions, would have been included. Unless I have missed them, they do not appear. There is a reference to a similar accusation (one of the worst of those detailed) made by an unnamed person at para 7.2. However, that person is identified as male. There are 11 references to ‘Hitler’ in your response. None of the others are of relevance to this. What happened to the allegation?

    Another participant to the programme stated that he saw someone who had posted online that Israel was responsible for the creation of ISIS and also for 9/11 and then saw that person at a party conference.
    The only mention in the dossier of 9/11 is at footnote 27, in relation to a Sunday Times report about postings on a pro Palestine site. This may well have been where the participant saw the post he mentions, but there is no mention of seeing someone who posted it at a Labour Party conference.
    The only mention of ISIS is in footnote 104, an allegation about a clearly different matter.

Comments are now closed.