A/74/358 the Government of Israel. In some cases, individuals expressing such views have engaged in Holocaust denial; in others, they have conflated Zionism, the self determination movement of the Jewish people, with racism, claimed that Israel does not have a right to exist and accused those expressing concern about antisemitism of acting in bad faith. 17 The Special Rapporteur emphasizes that it is never acceptable to render Jews as proxies for the Government of Israel. He further recalls that the Secretary-General has characterized “attempts to delegitimize the right of Israel to exist, including calls for its destruction” as a contemporary manifestation of antisemitism. 18 18. The Special Rapporteur further notes the claims that the objectives, activities and effects of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement are fundamentally antisemitic. 19 The movement promotes boycotts and stockholder divestment initiatives against Israeli or international corporations and institutions that supporters of the movement maintain are “complicit” in violations of the human rights of Palestinians by the Government of Israel. Critics of the movement assert that its architects have indicated that one of its core aims is to bring about the end of the State of Israel, and they further allege that some individuals have employed antisemitic narratives, conspiracies and tropes in the course of expressing support for the campaign. The Special Rapporteur notes that those allegations are rejected by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, including by one of its principal actors, who asserted that the movement was “inspired by the South African anti-apartheid and U.S. Civil Rights movements”; 20 maintained that they opposed all forms of racism and that they took steps against those who used antisemitic tropes in the campaign; and stressed that they employed “nonviolent measures to bring about Israel’s compliance with its obligations under international law”. 21 Concern about the adoption of laws that penalize support for the movement, including t he negative impact of such laws on efforts to combat antisemitism, have also been communicated to the Special Rapporteur. He recalls that international law recognizes boycotts as legitimate forms of political expression and that non-violent expressions of support for boycotts are, as a general matter, legitimate speech that should be protected. However, he also stresses that expression that draws on antisemitic tropes or stereotypes, rejects the right of Israel to exist or advocates discrimination against Jewish individuals because of their religion, should be condemned. C. Regional trends 19. Public attitudes towards Jews vary across the world. In Eastern European countries, for example, biased attitudes towards Jews are apparently prevalent among the general public. One study revealed that 55.98 per cent of Poles surveyed reported that they would not accept a Jew as a family member, 22 and some 42 per cent of Hungarians polled said they thought Jews held too much sway over the worlds of finance and international affairs. 23 In Poland, an effigy of Judas, depicted as a __________________ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 19-16257 See David Hirsh, Contemporary Left Antisemitism (Abingdon, Oxon, Routledge, 2018). See www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2018-09-26/secretary-generals-remarks-high-levelevent-power-education. See e.g. David M. Halbfinger, Michael Wines and Steven Erlanger, “Is B.D.S. anti-Semitic? A closer look at the Boycott Israel campaign”, New York Times, 27 July 2019. Based on information gathered from responses by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions national committee to questions raised by the Special Rapporteur on 15 July 2019. Ibid. See Don Snyder, “Anti-Semitism spikes in Poland – stoked by populist surge against refugees”, Forward, 24 January 2017. See https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2018/11/europe/antisemitism-poll-2018-intl/. 7/23