THE Scottish Government claimed that releasing information about a top minister’s secret meeting with an Israeli official would be “antisemitic”.
External Affairs Secretary Angus Robertson was previously forced to apologise after he held secret talks with Israel’s deputy ambassador to the UK, Daniela Grudsky.
He faced fierce criticism from SNP MPs, who have attacked the UK Government for supporting Israel during its deadly assault on Palestine, which has to date killed more than 53,000 people, mostly women and children.
Now, The Ferret have revealed that the Scottish Government argued that it would be “antisemitic” to release further logistical information about the meeting.
It comes after the investigative outlet submitted a freedom of information (FOI) request asking for correspondence about the meeting.
With officials refusing to disclose the information, The Ferret appealed to the information commissioner David Hamilton.
Hamilton said that “the withheld information is mostly concerning the logistical arrangements” of the meeting and that “the majority of information withheld by the [Scottish Government has no inherent sensitivity”.
He has since ordered it be released within six weeks, saying the Scottish Government had breached transparency laws “by failing to identify, locate, retrieve and properly consider all of the information that fell within scope of the request and incorrectly withheld information”.
Hamilton added in a report: “They argued that ignoring Israel’s wishes in circumstances where other countries’ wishes have been respected, could be considered as an antisemitic action under the IHRA definition.”
Palestine Solidarity Campaign director Ben Jamal said: “The IHRA definition of antisemitism, and its attendant examples, conflates criticism of the policies, practices, and constitution of the State of Israel, with antisemitism.
He added: “Its adoption, by the Scottish Government and other public bodies, undermines our ability to hold Israel accountable for harming Palestinians, and violating international law. This case illustrates the absurd injustice that can result, when the Scottish Government is seeking to avoid legitimate journalistic scrutiny over meetings with Israeli officials by falsely asserting it could be a breach of the IHRA definition and antisemitic.
“The Information Commissioner has rightly dismissed this flimsy assertion and the Scottish Government should reassess the validity of its position on the IHRA definition.”
Nick McGowan-Lowe, Scotland organiser at the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), said the Scottish Government is “lightning-quick to claim a commitment to the principles of openness, transparency and accountability, but is glacially slow when it comes to putting those same principles into action”.
He added: “The NUJ has long argued that Scotland’s FOI legislation is in dire need of reform, and will be lobbying for support of Katy Clark MSP’s bill at Holyrood to bring freedom of information laws into line for a modern democracy.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “We have received the Information Commissioner’s decision and are considering its terms. Freedom of Information legislation permits us to consider whether disclosure of information would, or would be likely to, prejudice substantially relations between the UK and any other state. This applies to all countries.”
