It is unclear why the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency has chosen now to adopt the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism as a ‘reference tool’.

The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) has taken a deeply divisive, politically charged decision that goes beyond its social and statutory roles. It should be reversed.

Since the beginning of Israel’s assault on Gaza two and a half years ago health professionals around the world have spoken out against the repeated attacks on hospitals and health personnel, the mass killings of civilians, including children, their forced starvation, and restrictions on access to medications and humanitarian relief. Criticisms have also been expressed by governments and international agencies, including those of the United Nations. The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants against several Israeli government ministers, including the Prime Minister, and the International Court of Justice is deliberating in a case accusing the government of genocide.

In Australia, grave concerns about the actions of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) have been widely expressed in the health professions, the universities, the arts and elsewhere, despite many attempts to suppress them as being antisemitic. For journalists and parliamentarians also, it has been made abundantly clear that they criticise Israeli actions at their peril.

This is the context of the announcement on 17 June 2026 by the Ahpra CEO, Justin Untersteiner, together with the Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, Jillian Segal, that Ahpra has decided to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism as a ‘reference tool’. This raises extremely important questions about the potential implications and the proper role of the statutory health regulator.

The IHRA definition of antisemitism has been widely and repeatedly criticised by multiple individuals and organisations,........

© Pearls and Irritations