University leader says her sector is 'most prominent' for rising antisemitism

Chancellor says universities hide behind freedom of speech to avoid taking action on hate speech Thu 16 Jul 2026 at 5:13am In short: The chancellor of Western Sydney University (WSU) has made a personal submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. Professor Westacott accuses the university sector of hiding behind free speech protections while allowing hate speech to flourish on campus. What's next: The National Tertiary Education Union warns against giving university leaders the "power to police political thought", suggesting academic freedom could become "collateral damage" The chancellor of Western Sydney University has criticised other university leaders and labelled universities "the most prominent sites of antisemitic activity" in a personal royal commission submission. "I speak as an Australian, and a leader, who has watched, with growing alarm, the unravelling of something we once took for granted: that Jewish Australians could live, study and work in safety and dignity," wrote Professor Jennifer Westacott in her submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. Professor Westacott is a former chief executive of the Business Council of Australia (BCA) and is a guardian of the Dor Foundation, a Jewish non-profit set up to fight antisemitism. She said universities "hid" behind the "concept of free speech" as well as academic freedom to avoid taking action on what was "plainly abhorrent" and "hate speech". "Placards calling for the murder of Jews, chants calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state, behaviour designed to intimidate and to drive fear into a specific group of people. That is not a contest of ideas. That is the deliberate targeting of people because of who they are," she wrote. Professor Westacott said the evidence suggested "Muslim students were among those who reported feeling unsafe on Australian campuses during this period". She said she was motivated to make her submission because of her failure to challenge and speak up about her own father's antisemitism during her childhood. "My early life was characterised by disadvantage, by moments of family dysfunction, and by sporadic but often severe violence. My father was an antisemite," Professor Westacott wrote. "I remember, as a young child, seeing an image on television of two people in striped prison clothing, hanging by their necks in a street. "I must have been visibly distressed, because my father said to me: 'Don't worry, that only happens to the Jews.'" She said Jewish friends she made while studying at university helped her develop "a deeper understanding of the profound danger and the effect of antisemitism on Jewish people". The royal commission is this week focusing on universities and has heard concerns from Jewish staff and students that campus authorities have been slow to act on their behalf. Professor Westacott attributed this to a "moral failure" of leadership across universities and wider society. "No one university, no one government department, no single entity, can be held solely responsible. This was a whole-of-nation failure to comprehend, in real time, the seriousness of what was happening," Professor Westacott wrote. She said the university sector had "stepped up" on tackling antisemitism since the height of the protests in 2024 but needed to maintain that momentum. Antisemitism must be addressed 'without sacrificing academic freedom' The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) has warned academic freedom could become "collateral damage" as university leaders consider further measures to protect Jewish staff and student. "Jewish students and staff have an absolute right to be safe, respected and free from antisemitism at university. That should not be controversial, conditional or negotiable," said NTEU Victoria branch president David Gonzalez. "But neither should academic freedom. "Universities cannot fight prejudice by placing controversial ideas, political criticism or entire fields of inquiry under managerial or political supervision." Mr Gonzalez said academic freedom did not protect vilification, harassment, intimidation or unlawful conduct. "We should be extremely wary of any proposal that hands managers broader authority to discipline staff for expressing contested political or scholarly views," Mr Gonzalez said. "University executives have an obvious conflict of interest when they claim the power to decide which criticism of their institution, its partners or its donors is legitimate." Mr Gonzalez said criticising the Israeli government and supporting Palestinian rights was not "by itself antisemitic". "Universities are not government departments, corporate public-relations offices or ideological comfort zones,"Mr Gonzalez said. "Their public purpose depends on staff and students being able to investigate powerful institutions, challenge accepted orthodoxies and reach conclusions that governments, donors and university executives may dislike." The royal commission is expected to hear from university leaders from Monash University and the Australian National University when hearings resume today.