A new study by the Yachin Institute for Research reveals alarming data on the extent of incitement and support for terrorism in higher education institutions in Israel since the outbreak of the war on October 7.
The study, based on freedom of information requests submitted to universities, reveals that out of 130 complaints received, only four cases ended with significant punishments.
According to the collected data, 130 complaints of incitement were received in academic institutions. Of these, 124 were filed against students and six against faculty members. Only four cases ended with significant punishments beyond a reprimand conversation.
The study indicates that an overwhelming majority of complaints were dismissed outright on the grounds that they "did not amount to incitement." Even in cases where disciplinary proceedings were initiated, many were closed without punishment.
A prominent example is the Hebrew University, where 39 complaints were filed - the highest number among all institutions. Of these, only two complaints led to the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, but these were eventually closed without punishment.
The report details several cases that sparked public outrage. At Tel Aviv University, for example, the Department of East Asian Studies equated the victims of the massacre to the victims of IDF attacks in Gaza. At Hebrew University, Prof. Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian was suspended from her position as a lecturer after making harsh statements against Israel and even denying rapes on October 7.
The study points to a gap between the declared policy of universities and its actual implementation. From reviewing policy documents and letters distributed in academic institutions, it appears that universities treat incitement and support for terrorism, as well as racism, as expressions that could disrupt campus relations and offend students' feelings, rather than as serious offenses that undermine the state's values.
Yachin Institute researchers note that they do not have detailed information on the content of the complaints and the manner of adjudication, making it difficult to determine whether universities are trivializing the handling of incitement. However, they emphasize the importance of the role of higher education institutions in a democratic society, not only in developing and advancing knowledge but also in strengthening the fundamental values of society.
The study raises the complex issue of balancing academic freedom of expression with the need to preserve State security, especially during wartime.
The researchers argue that there is an expectation for academic institutions, funded by the State, to strengthen national spirit and combat expressions that harm the State's and society's security, even at the cost of some infringement on freedom of expression.
One of the main challenges arising from the study is the existing legal situation. The Counter-Terrorism Law, 2016, defines criminal offenses related to terrorism, but its application within the academic framework is complex. Additionally, the Higher Education Council Law grants academic institutions broad autonomy in managing their affairs, complicating external intervention.
A freedom of information request submitted to Bar-Ilan University raises additional questions regarding the handling of incitement and racism in academic institutions. The request seeks to clarify whether there is a separation between handling incitement and support for terrorism offenses and handling racism offenses, and what bodies are responsible for each of these issues.
The request also seeks to clarify the complaint-handling process, from the steps required of the complainant to the complaint-handling stages. Additionally, questions are raised about the actions taken in the past two years to raise awareness of these issues, including advertising budgets and student training.
The authors of the Yachin Center report state that, "The role of higher education in a democratic society is to develop it, promote it, and even enrich the diversity of opinions within it. The state nurtures and funds higher education so that it enriches and strengthens society based on its fundamental principles (Jewish and democratic). Therefore, during wartime, there is an expectation that institutions educating the future generation, which have special status and funding, will strengthen the national spirit and even fight expressions that harm the State's and society's security, despite infringing on freedom of expression."
In light of the findings, the researchers call for a reexamination of the approach to handling incitement in academia. Among the suggestions they raise are clearer definitions of what constitutes incitement within the academic framework, establishing more effective oversight and enforcement mechanisms, and considering dedicated legislation to balance academic freedom of expression with the need to preserve State security.