Germany’s major political factions have reached a consensus on a parliamentary motion that would compel arts and science funding applicants to openly denounce anti-Semitism and affirm Israel’s right to exist. The Jewish community in Germany is likely to appreciate the non-binding resolution, which carries significant political weight and is slated for voting in September after months of confidential negotiation. However, some regard this move as another instance of Germany infringing on freedom of speech, a right safeguarded by the fifth article of the Basic Law established post World War II.
Since the Hamas attacks on October 7th, public funding and projects have been withdrawn from artists and scientists in Germany who have voiced criticisms of Israel’s actions in Gaza. Anxiety is mounting over the upcoming vote on the resolution, which is supported by the ruling coalition and the opposition Christian Democratic Union (CDU), due to speculation that it may further stifle free speech.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) defines anti-Semitism as a certain perception of Jews potentially manifesting as hatred toward Jews. This definition, adopted by Germany and 30 other European countries, with the exception of Ireland, is viewed as problematic by critics for its reference to Israel in over half of its 11 examples of anti-Semitism.
The idea of a parliamentary motion against anti-Semitism in the Bundestag originated from a 2022 controversy surrounding an exhibition of paintings containing anti-Semitic themes at a high-profile German art fair. This notion gained traction in the aftermath of the October 7th attacks.
As the final draft of the resolution circulates, some legal minds question whether it will garner more support than a similar proposal from the government of Berlin’s city-state. The city-state government had earlier in January announced fresh regulations mandating arts funding beneficiaries to disavow anti-Semitism and support Israel’s existence. However, the policy was rescinded weeks later due to legal concerns about its lack of legal certainty.
Germany’s Federal Minister for Culture, Claudia Roth, has yet to lay out her stance on the novel Bundestag resolution. On Wednesday, her office highlighted the crucial need for widespread collaboration in the battle against “anti-Semitism, xenophobia and all other kinds of misanthropy”, this alliance needs to coexist harmoniously with artistic freedom.
A representative for Ms Roth informed The Irish Times that “where necessary, it is mandatory that funding criteria are defined in a legally enforceable way”. Back in May of the preceding year, Ms Roth had commissioned and released a report from a renowned German constitutional lawyer. This report proposed that it was within the realm of legality to stipulate conditions for state arts funding. Still, it cautioned that proposing conditions akin to those suggested in the Bundestag’s anti-Semitism resolution would not only be impractical but ill-advised. The report suggested that such measures would necessitate the creation of an oversight body prone to misuse.
For some, the Bundestag anti-Semitism resolution brings to mind a 2019 parliamentary resolution that criticised the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic and mandated budget reductions for any person or entity that “proactively backs” the movement.
One year on from the resolution, the Bundestag’s in-house legal service underlined that this resolution was not law, and had it been law, it would have violated the essential right to freedom of speech and therefore would have been unconstitutional.
Although the Bundestag BDS resolution was non-binding and ended with the previous parliament’s term in 2021, opponents argue that its sway hasn’t ebbed in the decision-making process for German arts funding.
With the Bundestag heading into its summer recess, there is ongoing uncertainty over who will enforce the latest resolution’s principles. Last month, Felor Badenberg, Berlin’s Justice Minister at a state level, suggested that the role of scrutinising the viewpoints of public funding applicants be delegated to Germany’s domestic intelligence service.