The regulator’s adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition has triggered fears that criticism of Israel will be reprimanded.
Clinicians fear the AHPRA’s adoption of a contested definition of antisemitism could subject doctors who speak publicly about the humanitarian crisis in Palestine to regulatory scrutiny or complaints.
In a joint statement with Jillian Segal, the federal government’s special envoy to combat antisemitism, AHPRA announced it had adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism to guide its regulatory work.
The IHRA defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” – a definition that has drawn criticism, including from Australia’s largest Jewish organisation, for conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism.
The IHRA definition itself states that “criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic”.
The Jewish Council of Australia, in a submission to the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion, said that “[these definitions] suppress political speech and debate, deepen division[s] between communities, and risk intensifying the very antisemitism they purport to address”.
Between October 2023 and 23 February 2024, AHPRA received 63 notifications involving 43 health practitioners.
These notifications flagged alleged inappropriate social media posts concerning the Gaza conflict – 38 involved allegations of antisemitism or similar conduct, while 25 related to Islamophobia or comparable behaviour.
Two practitioners were subject to potential disciplinary action, but more than 70% of these notifications were closed, the medical watchdog announced in a March 2024 video conference.
Clinicians told The Medical Republic that the decision has raised concerns about regulatory overreach, with practitioners fearing their statements, academic work, or advocacy could draw scrutiny or complaints.
The lack of clear guidance about how the non-legally binding working definition would be applied in AHPRA notifications and investigations has compounded that anxiety within the medical community, they said.
There are fears, for instance, that posting about the independent United Nations commission of inquiry which labelled Israel’s war on Gaza as a genocide could result in an investigation.
Related
AHPRA’s chief executive, Justin Untersteiner, said the watchdog was committed to working with the special envoy (ASECA) to eliminate antisemitism from the healthcare system and ensure safe access to healthcare.
“Antisemitism costs lives and has no place in healthcare,” he said.
“AHPRA has adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism as a reference tool, supported by the Special Envoy’s handbook to support a consistent understanding of antisemitism in its contemporary forms in our regulatory work,” he added.
The IHRA definition was developed to provide governments, administrators, and civil society with a uniform framework for identifying and combating antisemitism, and has since been implemented with the aim to help monitor online content.
Mr Untersteiner said AHPRA was reviewing its vexatious notifications framework over concerns of the notifications process being weaponised, and had formed an advisory panel of practitioners to improve reporting and “strengthen safeguards”.
AHPRA’s social media guidance clarifies that activities which do not pose a risk to public safety, do not risk the public confidence in the profession, or do not require action to maintain professional standards are unlikely to warrant investigation.
The IHRA definition has been endorsed by the federal government and the antisemitism royal commission, which was established in direct response to the Bondi terror attack on 14 December 2025, in which 15 civilians died.
Comments on this article have been disabled.
