Dear Jennie/Legal Governance,
I today wish to submit a formal complaint against Anne Mitchell, Hove and Portslade Constituency Labour Party member, for content on her twitter page that I seem to be antisemitic.
Antisemitism in the world’s oldest evil that has sadly rotted away sections of our party in recent years. It’s infestation within our party’s ranks and a rank failure to route it out has tragically demeaned our party’s long and formidable history of fighting racism in all of its forms.
Example two of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism refers to accusations ‘…about Jews or such or the power of Jews as a collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.’
On several occasions on Facebook + Twitter, Ms Mitchell alleges, in different ways, that antisemitism is being ‘privileged’ over other forms of racism. I am unable to comprehend exactly how any form of racism could be ‘privileged’ over another, given its abhorrence collectively in any form. As a result, Ms Mitchell appears to be invoking a Jewish conspiracy theory, which example two, as quoted above, directly refers to. I therefore believe that Ms Mitchell is in direct conflict with the IHRA definition of antisemitism, as a result of online comments she has made. I include such online comments below.
Examples of antisemitism inside our party in recent years and the severity of its impact on our party’s integrity as an anti-racist party, are clear and evident for all to see. However, Ms Mitchell devotes much of her time on twitter to suggesting it is manufactured, conspiracist and in effect doesn’t exist. I also believe this to break example 2 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism. I include examples of such tweets below.
Example 3 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism refers to the accusations that ‘…Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish people or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.’ Example 6 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism refers to accusations of ‘Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.’
Example 6 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism refers to accusations that Jewish citizens are ‘…more loyal to Israel.’ Example 11 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism states: ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.’ As a result, I believe that Ms Mitchell is in direct conflict of the IHRA definition of antisemitism in questioning the Jewish Labour Movement about the IDF’s actions throughout the 2014 Gaza War. I also believe this in direct conflict with example 2 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism. I include this tweet below.
Example 7 of the IHRA definition of antisemitism relates to the denial of the ‘Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg. by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.’ Ms Mitchell appears to take pride in referring to Israel as a ‘racist, apartheid State’ with the exact awareness that this is contrary to the IHRA definition of antisemitism, and one of its working examples, and expressing her opposition to the definition as a result.
The term ‘Zionism’ simply relates to a ‘belief in the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.’ However, Ms Mitchell appears to display a disdainful obsession with Zionism.
Consequently, I believe Ms Mitchell to again be in direct conflict with the IHRA definition of antisemitism. I include such tweets below.
After an avoidable summer of turmoil and divisive and destructive naval-gazing, that significantly damaged the historic ties we have enjoyed with Britain’s Jewish community, our party finally adopted the IHRA definition of antisemitism, and all its working examples. Here are many concrete examples of Ms Mitchell breaching this definition. I believe that the inflammatory nature of her behaviour is clear for all to see. I look forward to hearing what action will be taken against Ms Mitchell, in light of this formal complaint.
Many thanks, Luke Stanger, Hove and Portslade CLP.