In the case of Dr D M v University of Bristol a tribunal has made a landmark ruling that anti-Zionism is a legally protected characteristic as it found in favour of a sacked university professor.
Dr DM was ‘unfairly dismissed’ from his post at Bristol University following remarks he made about Israel, it said.
The 108-page ruling found that expressing anti-Zionist views is a ‘philosophical belief and a protected characteristic’ under the 2010 Equality Act.
This sets a legal precedent that anyone expressing anti-Zionist beliefs is legally protected and cannot be sacked from their jobs.
Dr DM was sacked in 2021 after it was found his comments did not meet the ‘standards of behaviour’ expected from staff. This followed complaints by Jewish students who claimed he made them feel ‘uncomfortable and intimidated’.
The first was made in 2019 after he gave a lecture describing the ‘Zionist movement’ as one of the ‘five pillars of Islamophobia’. On the Electronic Intifada website, he also wrote: ‘There is a real question of abuse here, of Jewish students on British campuses being used as political pawns by a violent, racist foreign regime engaged in ethnic cleansing.’
In an ‘on the record’ email to Ben Bloch, a student and news editor of The Bristol Tab university newspaper, Dr DM said: ‘Zionism is and always has been a racist, violent, imperialist ideology premised on ethnic cleansing. It is an endemically anti-Arab and Islamophobic ideology. It has no place in any society.’
Since being dismissed, Dr DM, who works for Iranian state-owned television channel Press TV, has described Israel as ‘the enemy of world peace’.
He has also claimed that ‘Jews are not discriminated against’ and described the Bristol University Jewish Society as an ‘Israel lobby group’.
Dr DM said he felt ‘vindicated’ and ‘very proud’ at the employment tribunal’s ruling from Judge Rohan Pirani. He added: ‘This is not just a victory for me, but also a victory for pro-Palestine campaigners across Britain.’
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
