Antisemitism Reporting Center | Rias still refuses to publish incidents

The nationwide Research and Information Center on Antisemitism (RIAS) continues to refrain from publishing most of its thousands of documented cases—and thus from making them scientifically or journalistically verifiable. Thestate-funded reporting center stated this in response to an inquiry from the "nd" newspaper.

The call for greater transparency was made six weeks ago by a study by the Jewish Diaspora Alliance. It states that RIAS overdramatizes many antisemitic incidents, limits knowledge about antisemitism, and thus even makes it more difficult to prevent and combat. Instead, it serves the purpose of marginalizing political narratives. The term "Israel-related antisemitism" is also interpreted far too broadly. Therefore, the Diaspora Alliance demands that the allegedly increasing number of antisemitic incidents be investigated by third parties.

The vast majority of the recorded anti-Semitic incidents are not punishable ; Rias classifies them as "offensive behavior incidents." The organization justifies keeping these confidential on the grounds of data protection. Entries are anonymized in an internal information system, and names or other "direct references" cannot be researched. However, an "indirect personal reference" cannot be completely ruled out. "Therefore, the incident database is subject to data protection requirements, which include effective access restrictions," a spokesperson explained.

This is met with criticism from Itay Mashiach, who authored the study for the Diaspora Alliance. "In 2024, Rias documented 4,664 incidents without any victims and another 2,215 involving institutions – a total of 80 percent of all incidents," the researcher told "nd." It must be possible, at least for their publication, to "find a methodology or technology that creates greater transparency without any data protection violations."

As far as is known, many of the incidents of "offensive behavior" relate to graffiti or stickers in public spaces – these are therefore unlikely to be traced back to the sender or recipient. The same applies to mass emails – it remains unclear whether RIAS counts these multiple times. This is known from the Berlin register, some of whose reports are also included in the RIAS database. In that register, every sticker discovered accusing Israel of apartheid is recorded as an individual incident of "Israel-related antisemitism."

This broad definition of the term is also criticized in the Jewish organization's study. RIAS bases its definition of "Israel-related antisemitism" on the controversial and even more stringent IHRA definition. The reporting center added criteria that also equate many political statements with antisemitism—such as the portrayal of the State of Israel as a colonial project. However , many well-known researchers also maintain that apartheid exists in a settler-colonial Israel, or that the state's military is committing genocide in Gaza. Even the International Court of Justice in The Hague considers the accusation of genocide plausible as a preliminary suspicion.

Technically, it might be possible for Rias to categorize the documented cases more carefully. For example, entries about physical threats or attacks could be separated from impersonal mass mailings, stickers, graffiti on public buildings, or incidents in the context of gatherings. However, this is not desired: " The category 'non-personal antisemitic incidents' does not exist, so it cannot be searched for," explains Rias.

Apparently, it's not the technology that's the problem: With the help of financial support, Rias has developed its own "database technology" for the "documentation, categorization, and evaluation of anti-Semitic incidents." However, its functionality remains unclear—the organization explains that the software goes beyond a mere Excel application. However, it does not contain any automated routines or artificial intelligence applications.

Rias is now making its approach to reporting and counting antisemitic incidents available to other EU countries. To this end, the German organization has taken over the management of a newly founded "European Network for Monitoring Antisemitism" (ENMA). The network includes Jewish and non-Jewish organizations from Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Italy. The project is being funded with €400,000 from the EU Commission and a further €44,000 from a Berlin foundation . As in Germany, the European network will also apply the controversial IHRA definition—modified by Rias.

Itay Mashiach hopes that the ENMA project will now ensure greater transparency. "The public has the right to know what's behind the numbers and what RIAS actually counts as anti-Semitism. Expanding the methodology to other countries could create new pressure," the researcher told "nd."