A UK Appeals Tribunal has said that it is coherent to describe Zionism as a racist ideology, as it “promotes the establishment of a state for only one race of people”, adding that it could also be described as “colonial and imperialistic”.
“It is coherent to describe as ‘racist’ an ideology [Zionism] that promotes the establishment of a state [in this case, Israel] for only one race of people [Jewish] in a territory that formerly contained a large number of people of a different race [Palestinians],” the court said in a judgement handed down on Tuesday.
“Such an ideology, which supports the migration of members of the first group into the territory with the support of an imperial power to dislodge an indigenous population, could also coherently be described as colonial and imperialistic.”
The ruling comes from the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT), which upheld an earlier employment tribunal’s ruling that the University of Bristol unlawfully discriminated against Professor David Miller by dismissing him over comments expressing his anti-Zionist beliefs.
An earlier tribunal, in 2024, had ruled that Professor David Miller’s dismissal over his anti-Zionist beliefs amounted to unlawful direct discrimination by the university, which challenged that decision.
The EAT rejected Bristol’s challenge and held that the lower tribunal “had not erred in any of its conclusions on liability”, including its finding that Miller’s “protected philosophical beliefs” about Zionism.
CLICK FOLLOW: TO FOLLOW US
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on
Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other eSPORTY
Miller, a professor of political sociology who joined the University of Bristol in 2018, was dismissed for gross misconduct in October 2021 following public comments he made earlier that year about Zionism, Israel and Jewish student organisations.
His research focused on lobbying groups, including organisations linked to states such as Israel and South Africa.
In its 2024 ruling, the employment tribunal had found that Miller had been dismissed because of comments expressing his anti-Zionist beliefs, which it held were protected philosophical beliefs under the Equality Act 2010.
‘Decisive’ victory
It concluded that both his dismissal and the rejection of his internal appeal constituted unlawful direct discrimination.
The former academic described the judgement as a “decisive” victory for the anti-Zionist movement and said the “pressure campaign” against him had “spectacularly backfired”
Oxford Union declares Israel an ‘apartheid state responsible for genocide’
Read More »
“The University of Bristol’s attempt to overturn my 2024 Employment Tribunal victory has been comprehensively dismissed. We won on every single count,” Miller wrote on X.
“This is a public humiliation for the genocidal Zionist regime, whose assets in Britain bullied the University into sacking me and then dragged them into this futile appeal.”
The appeal tribunal agreed with the court’s conclusion that Miller’s beliefs – that political Zionism is inherently racist, imperialistic and colonial and should therefore be opposed – qualified for legal protection.
The tribunal also agreed that Miller’s February 2021 statements were manifestations of those beliefs and had materially influenced the university’s decision to dismiss him
While accepting that the university was pursuing legitimate aims, including protecting students and its reputation, the tribunal had concluded dismissal was a disproportionate response because Miller’s comments were lawful, were not found to be antisemitic, did not incite violence and did not threaten anyone’s safety.
It found a lesser disciplinary sanction would have been sufficient. The EAT upheld that reasoning.
The appeal tribunal also upheld the original tribunal’s finding that Miller had contributed to his own dismissal through comments directed at Jewish students and student societies.
It agreed that any unfair dismissal compensation should therefore be reduced by 50 percent.
However, it found the tribunal had not sufficiently explained its conclusion that there was a 30 percent chance Miller would have been fairly dismissed in 2023 over later social media posts, meaning that aspect of the remedy must be reconsidered.
