Written by: Rowey Worner Butcher
There was record attendance at ANUSA’s 2024 AGM, held on the 8th of May. The meeting, which is normally held in person, on campus, had to be moved online and held via Zoom due to capacity limits.
The online AGM was held over two different Zoom meetings, with an initial attendance of over 500 people in each. Due to technical difficulties in facilitating the attendance of all those interested, the meeting was delayed for over an hour.
The record attendance can be largely attributed to support gathered for two motions attempting to be moved in the meeting: motion 5.2 which endorses the “Jewish Council of Australia’s statements and stands with student encampments in Australia” and motion 5.3 titled “Jewish students have a right to belong in the ANU community”.
The meeting, which ran for over four hours, was fraught with amendments to both motions, and included staunch opposition between students supporting the encampment currently taking place on Kambri lawns, and some Jewish students who claim ANUSA’s support of the encampment endorses “antisemitic hate speech” and makes “Jewish students feel unsafe and unwelcome on campus”.
Motion 5.2 called for ANUSA to endorse the statement made by the Jewish Council of Australia on April 28th, which in part “rejects the claim that university encampments that are standing in solidarity with Gaza and Palestine are antisemitic.”
The motion further reaffirmed its condemnation of “all forms of discrimination including antisemitism and islamophobia” and affirmed “Jewish students have a right to participate in universities free from discrimination or antisemitism.”
A mover of the motion shared that, “as a student of the ANU it is my belief and right to express my disagreements with how the ANU spends its money,” adding that “the fundamental point of these encampments is to demand that universities like the ANU divest from all Israeli weapons manufacturers.”
The motion was seconded by another student, stating their position as an “anti-Zionist Jew”.
“I feel it is important for me, as an anti-Zionist Jew, to second this motion and stand in solidarity with Palestinians, as my culture and religion very often have been used as a weapon to commit genocide,” they stated in their support of the motion.
Quoting Sarah Schwartz, Executive Officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, the student said “There is nothing antisemitic about strong criticism of Israel or calls for freedom and justice for Palestinians.”
Speakers against the motion stated they felt they “supported the right to protest peacefully, but as a Jewish student, I have not felt that that has been the goal of the encampment”, later quoting “violent rhetoric” allegedly used by the encampment.
Another speaker against the motion stated “one of the leaders of the encampment pledged their ‘unconditional support’ to Hamas,”, in reference to comments made by former ANUSA Education Officer Beatrice Tucker made on ABC Drive on April 30, 2024.
Following Tucker’s interview, ANUSA released a statement declaring they “do not support or condone statements regarding Hamas made by students on ABC Drive”, referring to an earlier statement made by the organisation in March condemning the actions of Hamas. They also withdrew their support from the encampment.
Further, in a statement to the media, ANU noted they “do not comment on individual matters” but “will take disciplinary action” for any actions that “violate our code of conduct or Australian laws.”
Tucker has since been suspended from ANU, and is awaiting a disciplinary hearing to determine further action on Tuesday 14 May.
Ultimately, motion 5.2 passed after nearly forty minutes of discussion.
Following this, motion 5.3 “Jewish students have a right to belong in the ANU community” was debated at length. The original motion consisted of ten key points, including the condemnation of Hamas, and calling for a two-state solution to end the conflict in the Middle East.
There was also a note condemning the statements made by Tucker on ABC Drive, with the mover of the motion calling the statements “abhorrent”.
The mover of the motion also referred to calls made on social media to “defeat” the “Zionist motion”, questioning “Why is Zionist being thrown around as a derogatory term?”
“We need to repair the damage that has been inflicted on this student union, and we can start with this motion”, they added.
The seconder of the motion agreed, saying Jewish students currently feel “betrayed and upset”.
An amendment was received to the motion to strike 7 of the 10 points from the motion, including those referring to Tucker’s statements, leaving only points 7, 8, and 10 which read:
“7. affirms that Jewish students have a right to participate in ANUSA, in a discrimination-free environment;
8. affirms that Jewish students have a right to participate and belong to the University community;
10. encourages students to participate in governance review and reflect on how ANUSA could engage with the broader ANU community.”
Speakers for the amendment stated they “deeply believed” in the right for Jewish students to feel safe on campus, however that those points in the motion which were up for amendment “are not in the spirit of that purpose, and are instead intended only to falsely discredit Palestinian activism on campus as inherently antisemitic.”
They further stated that the points they wished to strike from the motion “conflate Judaism with Zionism,” and “ignores the varying political thought and personal feelings of Jewish students on this campus.”
Students who supported the original motion have since stated that the motion was “slashed beyond recognition” with “no opportunity for the original movers to present their original motion unaltered and on their terms”.
Ultimately, motion 5.3 passed with those original amendments proposed, as well as another proposed later in the debate which stated that “ANUSA condemns the incorrect statement that the pro-Israel counter-protesters are ‘definitely paid actors’”, referring to a point made in the preamble of the motion.
In the process of discussion of the motion, and its subsequent passing, there were alleged offences of the use of nazi salutes and imagery. Those alleged perpetrators were immediately barred from the meeting by ANUSA.
A spokesperson from the ANU stated that “ANU will investigate the incident in accordance with the University’s existing processes and take appropriate action as required.”
“To be clear, any racism or hate speech, including anti-Semitism, is unacceptable at ANU. The University acts swiftly if such behaviour occurs.”
To follow, motion 5.4 was also heavily debated, with calls for ANUSA to “reaffirm its condemnation of the Hamas attacks on Israel.”
The motion also called for ANUSA to release a report on financial and material resources allocated to the encampment.
“Tonight marks a momentous occasion in the history of student politics,” one speaker in support of the motion stated.
In opposition to the motion, a speaker noted that the treasurer of ANUSA, Will Burfoot, had already stated earlier in the meeting that the encampment received “no financial compensation” and has instead received “in kind support as is available to all ANU protests.”
Motion 5.4 failed to pass.
The AGM concluded after passing the final motion proposed titled “Some Cleanup” regarding amendments to be made to the titling of different bodies within ANUSA.
Those divisions apparent during the AGM have continued to play out in the days following. On social media, students have expressed dissatisfaction, stating “disappointment” and “a failure to listen.”
Investigations are now being undertaken in regard to the alleged “nazi-inspired” protests undertaken in the meeting.
In an email to the ANU student body, ANU Vice-Chancellor Genevieve Bell has stated that she has “reached out to organisers of the current encampment to discuss ways to enable to protest to continue in more respectful ways.”
She added that she was “deeply concerned” by alleged reports of conduct by some attendees at the AGM, and stated that the university has taken “disciplinary action” and will continue to “take action where it is necessary to ensure our campus remains a safe place to learn and work.”
It is not yet clear what the nature of said disciplinary action is, or which students are affected.
Observer will continue to explore the ramifications of the meeting on the broader student body.
Graphics by: Annisa Zatalini
Know something we don’t know? Email [email protected] or use our anonymous tip submission.
If you have an issue with this article, or a correction to make, you can contact us at [email protected], submit a formal dispute, or angry react the Facebook post.
Want to get involved? You can write articles, photograph, livestream or do web support. We’re also looking for someone to yell “extra!” outside Davey Lodge at 1AM. Apply today!
