Harvard Continues To Victimize Pro-Palestinian Students Amid Criticism Of Its Adoption of Controversial AntiSemitism Definition

Supporters of two Harvard students, Ibrahim I. Bharmal and Elom Tettey-Tamaklo call for the college to end their criminal prosecution for their roles as safety marshals at a peaceful protest held at the university’s business school on October 18, 2023. 

Students conduct a “Die-in” protest at Harvard on October 18, 2023.

 

During a“Die-In” peaceful demonstration, first-year Israeli student Yoav Segev disrupted the protest and in an act of provocation recorded participants without their consent. 

One law student at the protest, Corinne Shanahan, said she believed he was filming the protestors “in bad faith, either to intimidate or dox them.” He was described as walking over people and recording their faces, making them uncomfortable. 

In response to Tettey Tamaklo and Bharmal escorting Segev away from the demonstration, wearing keffiyehs and safety vests to obstruct his camera, both were charged with assault and battery. 

Elom Tettey-Tamaklo speaking at a peaceful protest on October 18, 2023.

 

Muslim civil rights groups have joined the chorus of support for them demanding the dismissal of the charges against them. 

Even faculty members who have joined student activist groups such as the Harvard College Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) have expressed their support through social media posts, a petition, and a written statement. 

MPAC has released a statement calling for the charges to be dismissed and launched a petition on their behalf. 

Salam Al-Marayati leads the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a national American Muslim advocacy and public policy organization. 

 

In a community email, MPAC said, “These young leaders acted to protect the safety of all participants at the protest, yet they have been wrongfully targeted by a system that too often discriminates against Muslim and African-American advocates. Their actions were lawful and peaceful—and they deserve our full support.” 

MPAC, alongside many others, has called into question the discriminatory nature of the treatment the two men are facing, likening it to racial and religious profiling. 

“We are deeply alarmed by the decision of District Attorney Kevin Hayden’s office to selectively prosecute Ibrahim and Elom, both minority students of color, which we view as a transparent attempt to discriminatorily criminalize peaceful protests and silence voices of dissent, particularly those from Muslim and African-American communities” MPAC stated. 

Their arraignment has been postponed multiple times, leaving their lives in legal limbo for over a year. 

This delay is unusual, and both Harvard and the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office have been accused of failing to provide sufficient evidence to justify the charges. 

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) works to advance and promote Holocaust education, remembrance, and research worldwide. 

 

Criticism of Harvard’s attack on free speech has been bolstered by news that Ivy League college has just adopted the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism into the institution’s nondiscrimination policy. 

This restrictive clause states: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” 

However, Kenneth Stern, the director of Bard College’s Center for the Study of Hate, who was involved in the authoring of this definition in 2004 has said it was never intended to guide disciplinary action. 

Kenneth Stern was involved in the creation of the IHRA’s definition of Antisemitism. 

He disagrees with campus and governments using it to police speech about Israel, saying that “It was never intended to be a de facto speech code on a campus.” 

Critics of Harvard’s decision view it as a polarizing and restrictive definition that hinders political speech opposing Israel’s government. 

The university’s Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine chapter wrote in a statement that it “strongly opposes” the adoption of this definition, and criticized the school, saying that “in accepting the IHRA definition, Harvard has proved itself to be amenable to political pressure rather than intellectual debate.” 

The Director of Harvard’s Nonviolent Action Lab, Jay Ulfelder, also spoke out against this decision, citing it as the final push in his decision to resign. In an open letter, he attacked the university’s “response to the genocide in Gaza and deepening repression of campus activism against it.” 

Jay Ulfelder, Director of Harvard’s Nonviolent Action lab has resigned.

 

Harvard was embroiled in controversy after a national media backlash against the Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee (PSC) for a statement following Oct. 7. 

Students affiliated faced doxxing attacks, rescinded job offers and safety concerns for speaking out. 

The statement, which asserted that Israel was “entirely responsible” for the violence was initially signed by over 30 student organizations. 

Pro-Israel groups enlisted the media in vilifying 26 students connected to the co-signing groups, with a billboard truck displaying their names and faces under the title “Harvard’s Leading Antisemites” and websites dedicated to condemning them. 

Students have had their names and faces displayed publicly, labeled “Harvard’s Leading Antisemites”

 

For many, Harvard’s adoption of the IHRA definition is just another repressive step that undermines free speech. 

MPAC has backed Ulfelder and others saying the definition “dangerously conflates legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies with antisemitism and poses a severe threat to free academic discourse.” 

The university has defended the decision, stating on a FAQ webpage that the IHRA definition won’t be the only factor in making disciplinary decisions, and will be used “to the extent that those examples might be useful in determining discriminatory intent.” 

Harvard is now the second prestigious East Coast university to incorporate the definition, New York University being the first. 

Harvard University’s move has called its credibility into question.

This move supports claims that the institution has an implicit bias towards pro-Israel students, founded by its actions in response to student protests. 

Thousands of Pro-Palestinian students at many universities in the U.S. faced significant backlash, including disciplinary action, public smear campaigns, and false accusations of antisemitism. 

Counsel for Ibrahim I. Bharmal and Elom Tettey-Tamaklo are asking for community support as the next court appearance for what they believe is legal persecution is scheduled for February 27.