Report comment

The SDT should have exercised greater leniency. Mark Lewis was clearly the victim of anti-Semitism and of the nastiest type as well (short of physical violence). Rather than putting Mark's words on an equal footing with the racist perpetrators, the SDT would have been better advised to make a finding against Mark (for the use of his words) but to impose no fine or costs given the extenuating circumstances. The SDT should not be neutral (as it apparently was) in its Judgment and should have very clearly condemned the racism directed at Mark.

I did go to Mark's Twitter page today with a view to expressing my support for him directly but I was deterred after seeing some of the contributors to his Twitter page who purport to be his supporters (self-declared Zionists and others who conflate anti-Semitism with expressing criticism of Israel). As someone who has actively opposed racism all my life but who has also lived in Israel and has recently seen at first hand the racist and discriminatory legal system used against Palestinians by the state of Israel, it is a cause for regret that I (and perhaps others in the legal profession) cannot express their support to Mark directly without fear of being assumed to be pro-Israel. The two (anti semitism and anti the State of Israel) are distinct and different. Those who deliberately conflate the two undermine the fight against anti-Semitism by diluting its meaning.