South African Human Rights Commission obo South African Jewish Board of Deputies v Masuku: The rejection of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition.

South African Journal on Human Rights

The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism is routinely invoked to silence legitimate criticism of the State of Israel. According to the definition, comparisons of Israel to apartheid South Africa are antisemitic. Authoritative and compelling research and reports, which conclude that Israel is an apartheid state, are thus regularly disregarded as antisemitic hate speech. This has severely restricted principled pro-Palestine activism and a just resolution of the conflict. But, in South Africa, for no longer. In the 2022 case of SAHRC v Masuku, the South African Constitutional Court, the country’s apex court, considered whether comments accusing Israel of discriminatory apartheid practices constitute antisemitic hate speech. The Constitutional Court held that it does not. This essay discusses the judgment and its implications on the constitutional validity and political relevance of the Alliance definition.

Source: Published online

(Subscription required)

Share:

More Posts

Cutting out the middle step in facilitated mass retrenchments disputes 

On 29 May 2026, the Constitutional Court in NUMSA and Others v Industrial Oleo Chemical Products [2026] ZACC [22] clarified that, in a facilitated largescale retrenchment, it is not necessary to first refer a dispute to conciliation before approaching the Labour Court to challenge the substantive fairness of the dismissal. The judgment brings certainty in relation to section 189A(7) of the Labour Relations Act (“LRA”), following a line of conflicting judgments in the Labour and Labour Appeal Courts.

Armed picket during protected strike does not automatically justify dismissal

The Labour Appeal Court, in Mondi South Africa v CEPPWAWU (DA25/24) [2026] ZALAC 20 (6 May 2026), upheld the reinstatement of employees dismissed for carrying weapons during a protected strike, finding that the arbitrator’s decision to impose a sanction less than dismissal fell within the range of reasonable decisions under the circumstances.

Unfair discrimination claim upheld despite differences in job titles

The Labour Court, in Southern African Clothing and Textile Workers’ Union v Alpha Pharm (Pty) Ltd, considered whether black employees who perform similar work to their white counterparts, but earn significantly less, were unfairly discriminated against on the basis of race. The case focused on whether differences in job titles and historical employment arrangements justify pay disparities. CTH acted for the trade union and its members.

Contact Us

How can we help?

Please fill in your details below and we will be in touch.