Judge Bernard Larocque

By Joel Goldenberg
The Suburban

Superior Court Judge Bernard Larocque granted McGill University student Samuel Levkovsky and many other complainants permission to proceed with its case against the Students’ Society of McGill University regarding what they consider to be its biased policy on what constitutes antisemitism.

The judge also issued a six-month restraining order against the SSMU, halting the ratification of the policy. The students are represented by Spiegel Ryan lawyer Neil Oberman, and Choueke Hollander’s Michael Hollander. As reported by The Suburban last December, Superior Court Judge Daniel Urbas granted a 10-day injunction halting the ratification of the policy.

The SSMU policy against antisemitism, which on the surface appeared to be a straightforward denouncing of the portrayal of all Jews as evil and blaming them for actions by Israel, did not include disproportionate criticism of Zionism and Israel. “This narrow framing effectively permitted an environment where hate could persist on campus, as it excluded any negative sentiments aimed at Israel and its inhabitants from being classified as antisemitic,” Oberman told The Suburban.

Generally, the lawyer explained that the case involved “the fundamental right of students to express their voices and concerns as stipulated by the bylaws and regulations of the SSMU.

“Unfortunately, despite having secured an injunction aimed at safeguarding their rights in December, the SSMU chose to disregard this legal protection. They proceeded with actions that were deemed unlawful, specifically seeking to ratify a controversial policy known as the null policy. This particular policy was poised to have detrimental effects on Jewish students on campus, raising serious concerns about discrimination and antisemitism.”

Oberman added that the complainants had no choice but to stop the ratification process. “We sought justice for those affected and aimed to ensure that all student voices were heard in matters directly impacting their community.”

In light of the March 5 judgment, Oberman said the SSMU policy on antisemitism cannot be legitimized or upheld moving forward. “The need for a more inclusive and accurate definition is crucial in order to combat all forms of hatred effectively and ensure that all individuals feel safe and respected within the community.”