Judgment Approved by the court for handing down. [2025] EWHC 1170 (Admin) AC-2024-LON-001310 HUSAIN v SRA or “placeholder” for “Jew”. The Tribunal was also entitled to see in these posts a reflection of the antisemitic conspiracy theory that the media is controlled by Jews and the antisemitic trope that Jewish citizens are more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of the countries of which they are citizens. The Tribunal was entitled, and in my view clearly correct, to regard these posts as instances of antisemitism. 121. On 10 and 12 May 2021, the core message Mr Husain was delivering was that the establishment of the State of Israel involved the displacement of the Palestinian people by Jews who in the immediate past originated from outside the land that is currently Israel. That message fell in principle within the bounds of legitimate political debate, but Mr Husain chose to deliver it in racially charged terms by referring to “a murderous bunch of Eastern European Zionists” and “a bunch of Eastern European thugs” and chose to call on Israelis to “leave and go back to Poland/Hungary whence you came”. Mr Husain returned to this theme on 13 May 2021 when he tweeted: “100 percent of your ancestor Zionist ass are from Eastern Europe” and on 2, 5 and 6 June 2021, when he referred again in abusive terms to people from Poland and Eastern Europe and to “Ashkenazi immigrants”. The Tribunal was entitled to see these references as attempts to racialise the point he was making by singling out one of the places (Eastern Europe) from which Jews currently living in Israel and their recent ancestors came (when many came from the Middle East, North Africa and other places). This was, in my judgment, a sufficient basis for the Tribunal to categorise these comments as antisemitic. I doubt whether it was necessary to refer in addition to the “trope that Jews do not originate from Israel”. 122. On 16 May 2021, the use of the language “Zionist PIG” and reference to his interlocutor having been “brought up as a racist Zionist in apartheid othering and killing Palestinians” was a clear example of racialised abuse. There was another such example on 6 June 2021, when Mr Husain tweeted about “typical Zionist shite” and said that Hugo Rifkind was “a Zionist pig supporting theft of Palestine for his Eastern European kin”. These comments were examples of antisemitic racism. As the Tribunal noted, the term “pig” is especially offensive to many Jews and has historically been used to dehumanise them. The Tribunal could properly infer that the word was selected with that in mind. The Tribunal was right to say that the term “Zionist” was here being used again as a code word or “placeholder” for “Jew”. That was how Mr Rifkind interpreted it—and any reasonable reader with a reasonable understanding of the main historical and cultural manifestations of antisemitism would agree. 123. The language used on 20 May 2021 to draw comparisons between Nazi Germany and contemporary Israeli policy (in particular the use of the terms “UNTERMENSCHEN” and “Lebensraum”) were examples of the kind of racialised taunt I have described in [110] above. This tweet was not part of a reasoned comparative historical analysis. It had to be read in the context of those which preceded and followed it. In that context, the Tribunal was entitled to regard it as antisemitic. 124. On 22 May 2021, Mr Husain tweeted: “Israel wants to sing at Eurovision so they should relocate to Eastern Europe where Netanyahu and his vile kind along with Turds like Yitzhak Shamir emerged from.” If a statement of this kind had been made about black politicians whose ancestors had come from Africa, there would be no doubt about how to categorise it. There should be no doubt about this post either. It is an example of