‘Let the public be the judge’: Coalition says PM, Wong and others must front royal commission

The Albanese government’s decision to establish a royal commission into antisemitism in Australia was met with widespread praise and relief from the Jewish community after the Bondi Beach attack last year. However, critics are now calling for the deadline to be extended, arguing that the inquiry has not gone far enough in holding those responsible for rising antisemitism accountable.

Liberal MP Julian Leeser highlighted the perceived shortcomings of the commission in parliament on Tuesday, citing the absence of key government ministers and high-profile figures from various sectors. His list includes Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, and former Coalition treasurer Josh Frydenberg. The fact that these influential individuals have not been called to testify raises questions about their accountability.

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry’s decision not to comment on whether the royal commission should be extended suggests that the community may be satisfied with the progress made so far or hesitant to rock the boat. A senior figure in the Jewish community, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed concerns that leaders are “not clamouring” for an extension due to fears that the inquiry could lose momentum.

The royal commission’s tight deadline has put pressure on Commissioner Virginia Bell to deliver a final report by December 14 this year without compromising the integrity of the investigation. Leeser argued that the commission has been “unable to do its job properly” without government ministers appearing, which raises concerns about the scope and depth of the inquiry.

An extended deadline would give individuals like Albanese, Wong, and others a chance to answer questions about their handling of antisemitism in the two years leading up to the Bondi attack. However, it could also muddy the waters, allowing those responsible to wriggle free from accountability.

As we reflect on the events that have unfolded since the Bondi tragedy, our national conversation around antisemitism remains incomplete. We are still grappling with the complexities of this issue, and the royal commission’s findings will be crucial in shaping our understanding.

Leeser’s assertion that “Let the public be the judge” is a call to action for Australians to look beyond partisan politics and special interest groups. By relying on the evidence gathered by the royal commission, we can draw our own conclusions about the state of antisemitism in Australia today.

The stakes are high, and the consequences of failure will be dire. As we await the final report, it is clear that this is not a debate for the faint of heart. It requires courage, commitment, and a willingness to confront the darker aspects of our national psyche.

The Politics of Accountability

Leeser’s list of names raises important questions about the role of politics in accountability. Should those with influence be held accountable for their actions, or is it enough that they are simply asked to testify? The case of former Coalition treasurer Josh Frydenberg, who was told he would not be called to testify, highlights the complexities of accountability.

The fact that Leeser named him specifically suggests that there are still many questions to answer. Is it a coincidence that he was spared from scrutiny, or is there something more at play here? The absence of key government ministers and high-profile figures from various sectors raises concerns about the scope and depth of the inquiry.

A Complex History

Antisemitism in Australia has a complex and fraught history. From the early days of White Australia policies to the present day, our national conversation around antisemitism has been marked by periods of silence, complacency, and even outright hostility.

The royal commission’s findings will be crucial in shedding light on this dark chapter in our national story. However, we must also be mindful of the broader context: the rise of white nationalism, Islamophobia, and other forms of bigotry that have come to define our national discourse.

The Human Cost

As we debate the merits of an extended deadline, let us not forget the human cost of antisemitism in Australia. The Bondi Beach attack was a horrific reminder of the consequences of hate speech, radicalization, and xenophobia.

The stories of Naveed Akram and his father, Sajid, who were accused of carrying out the attack, are a stark reminder of the devastating impact of these ideologies on our community. We must not let partisan politics or special interest groups hijack this conversation; instead, we should focus on building a more inclusive, compassionate society that values diversity and promotes social cohesion.

What’s Next?

As the royal commission’s final report approaches, one thing is certain: this is just the beginning of a long and difficult conversation about antisemitism in Australia. We must be willing to confront our own biases, challenge our assumptions, and work towards a more inclusive national narrative.

The question now is: what will we do with the findings of the royal commission? Will we use them as a catalyst for change, or will we simply tuck them away in a corner of our collective psyche? The choice is ours.