DistantNews
Support us
🇮🇱 Israel /Crime & Justice

Australian judge rejects IHRA definition, rules ‘F*** Israel’ graffiti is not antisemitic

From Jerusalem Post · () English

Translated from English and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.

At a glance

News Documents & data Outcome reported
  • Justice Desmond Fagan rejected an application for extended supervision of Mohommed Farhat, who pleaded guilty to vandalism and received a 20-month prison sentence.
  • Fagan ruled that “Fuk Israel” graffiti expressed hostility toward the State of Israel, not hatred of Jews as Jews.
  • The decision drew outrage from mainstream Australian Jewish groups, according to the report.

An Australian judge has ruled that graffiti reading “Fuk Israel” did not qualify as antisemitic, rejecting the state’s effort to use the slogan as evidence of an extremist ideology.

New South Wales Supreme Court Justice Desmond Fagan made the finding in State of New South Wales v Farhat. Mohommed Farhat pleaded guilty to a series of vandalism offenses in November 2024, including spray-painting “PKK,” “PKK coming” and “Fuk Israel” on vehicles and buildings in Sydney’s Woollahra suburb. He also set fire to a vehicle and received a 20-month prison sentence.

Afterward, the NSW government sought an extended supervision order under the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017. The order would have imposed 55 conditions after Farhat completed his sentence. To obtain it, the state had to show a high probability that Farhat would pose an unacceptable risk of committing a serious terrorism offense if released without supervision.

crude expressions of political hostility to the State of Israel, [and were] not antisemitic according to the ordinary understanding of that concept in the Australian community.

— Justice Desmond FaganThe judge characterized the graffiti while rejecting the state’s application for extended supervision.

The state argued that the graffiti indicated an antisemitic ideological motivation and might point to an ideology associated with Hezbollah. Fagan rejected that argument, describing the slogan as “crude expressions of political hostility to the State of Israel, [and were] not antisemitic according to the ordinary understanding of that concept in the Australian community.”

He said the location, where many residents may be Jewish, did not give the curse an antisemitic character. Fagan also found that Farhat did not understand the slogan as hostility toward Jews and did not intend to express hatred of Jews. His references to Jewish criticism of Israel and Australian Jewish organizations prompted strong criticism from mainstream Jewish groups.

did not understand the slogan to convey hostility to Jews as Jews and he did not intend to express hatred of Jews.

— Justice Desmond FaganThe judge explained why he did not treat the graffiti as antisemitic.
About this summary

Originally published by Jerusalem Post in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.

More Stories

From Our Blog