The Bill That Could Make Italy the First Country to Criminalise Speech Under the IHRA Definition, With Help From the LeftItaly is on the verge of passing a law that could fundamentally redraw the boundaries of political speech in the country. The bill, now heading toward a full floor vote in the Senate after clearing its committee amendment phase, is backed by the governing right-wing coalition of Fratelli d'Italia, Lega, and Forza Italia. But its passage has been complicated, and in many ways accelerated, by a fierce internal feud inside the Partito Democratico that has split the party's reformist wing from the Schlein-led majority, created an unexpected cross-party axis, and left Italy's centre-left scrambling for coherence on one of the most charged issues in European politics.A Country Facing a Real ProblemThe push for stronger legislation is not without justification. According to the CDEC Foundation, Italy's Jewish community antisemitism watchdog, there were 877 documented incidents of antisemitism in Italy in 2024, nearly double the 454 incidents recorded the year before. Supporters of the bill, including Victor Fadlun, president of the Jewish Community of Rome, argue that existing laws, including the Legge Mancino, which already criminalises hate speech and incitement to discrimination, are no longer sufficient to address the scale and sophistication of modern antisemitic expression, particularly online.For many in the Jewish community, the surge in incidents since the outbreak of the Gaza conflict in October 2023 has made legislative action feel urgent. For them, this bill represents not a threat to democracy but a belated defence of it. A Party Divided Against ItselfThe central figure in the PD's internal rupture is Graziano Delrio, a former minister of transport, a doctor who completed his postgraduate specialisation in endocrinology with research stints in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel, and one of the most prominent senators in the party's reformist current. In late November 2025, Delrio presented a bill, drafted in personal dissent from his party group, that would incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) operational definition of antisemitism into Italian law. The move was immediately disowned by the PD leadership. Senate group president Francesco Boccia declared it a purely personal initiative that did not represent the position of the group or the party. But Delrio was far from alone. The bill was co-signed by ten other PD senators, including Simona Malpezzi, Alessandro Alfieri, Alfredo Bazoli, Pier Ferdinando Casini, Tatjana Rojc, Filippo Sensi, Valeria Valente, Walter Verini, Sandra Zampa, and Antonio Nicita. Shortly after, Andrea Martella and Beatrice Lorenzin also added their signatures. As of this week, Delrio has gone further still. Speaking to Il Foglio on February 27, he confirmed he will vote in favour of the bill when it reaches the Senate floor, citing meaningful concessions from the majority during the amendment process, including a softening of the IHRA reference and the dropping of both criminal sanctions and the proposed ban on demonstrations. The Israel ConnectionDelrio's personal ties to Israel have become part of the debate. In May 2025, as university campuses across Italy were engulfed by protests demanding an end to academic cooperation with Israeli institutions, and as over a million people took to the streets in solidarity with Gaza, Delrio flew to Israel. He met with Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar and Knesset president Amir Ohana, and later described the meetings as "fruitful," saying he had shared his experience as a former minister and "suggested seeking solidarity and common actions." Critics, including writers at the progressive outlet Terzogiornale, have drawn a direct line between that visit, an Israeli university monitoring report identifying Italian campuses as hotbeds of anti-Israel activity, and the subsequent introduction of the bill just four days after the report's publication. The bill's articles 3 and 4 include a provision for an internal university official with the power to assess events and activities deemed to violate the IHRA definition, a mechanism that maps closely onto recommendations in the Israeli report. Delrio's supporters, and the senator himself, reject any suggestion of improper coordination. He is a prominent figure in Sinistra per Israele, an association founded in 1967 to maintain links between the Italian left and Israel, and his engagement with Israeli officials reflects longstanding personal and political convictions rather than any hidden agenda. His academic ties to Israel predate his political career by decades. The question of whether his bill is a response to Jewish communal pressure, to Israeli diplomatic lobbying, to a genuine rise in antisemitism, or to some combination of all three, is one on which reasonable people disagree, and one the parliamentary debate has not resolved. The IHRA Definition and Why It MattersAt the heart of the controversy is the IHRA operational definition of antisemitism, which has been adopted by 24 EU member states, the European Commission, and the European Parliament, and which the Italian government under Giuseppe Conte incorporated into a council of ministers resolution in January 2020. Elly Schlein herself voted in favour of the IHRA framework when she was a member of the European Parliament, a fact that PD reformists have been quick to recall. The definition identifies a set of examples of contemporary antisemitism, several of which extend into territory many activists and scholars consider legitimate political speech. These include claiming that the existence of the State of Israel is a form of racism, applying double standards to Israel by demanding behaviour not required of any other democratic state, and drawing comparisons between Israeli policy and Nazi conduct. Supporters say the definition is routinely misread. Noemi Di Segni, president of the Union of Italian Jewish Communities (UCEI), has stressed that the definition explicitly states that criticism of Israel similar to that directed at any other country cannot be considered antisemitic. PD vice-president of the European Parliament Pina Picierno has dismissed concerns as "instrumental criticisms that smack of justificationism and hypocrisy." Critics see it differently. AVS senator Peppe De Cristofaro has argued the bill places the fight against antisemitism on the same level as criticism of the Israeli government. His party colleague Angelo Bonelli warned that prominent Jewish voices including Anna Foa and Gad Lerner, who have publicly criticised Israeli state conduct, could theoretically fall within the law's scope. A group of Italian academics published an open letter calling the approach potentially "liberticidal." Both sides are making arguments that deserve to be taken seriously. Whether a law is needed, and what form it should take, are questions on which people of good faith hold irreconcilable positions. What Comes NextThe bill is expected to reach the Senate floor imminently. Delrio and the PD reformists are likely to provide enough votes, alongside the governing majority and the centrist parties Italia Viva and Azione, to ensure passage. The PD leadership, represented by Boccia, attempted this week to block the scheduling of the floor vote and failed. If the law passes, Italy will become the first country in the world to criminalise antisemitic speech based on the IHRA definition. Whether that is a historic step forward in the fight against one of Europe's oldest hatreds, or a step toward a legal architecture that could be turned against legitimate dissent, may not be known until someone tests it in court. Ph: Teo K / Shutterstock.com

Italy is on the verge of passing a law that could fundamentally redraw the boundaries of political speech in the country. The bill, now heading toward a full floor vote in the Senate after clearing its committee amendment phase, is backed by the governing right-wing coalition of Fratelli d'Italia, Lega, and Forza Italia. But its passage has been complicated, and in many ways accelerated, by a fierce internal feud inside the Partito Democratico that has split the party's reformist wing from the Schlein-led majority, created an unexpected cross-party axis, and left Italy's centre-left scrambling for coherence on one of the most charged issues in European politics.The push for stronger legislation is not without justification. According to the CDEC Foundation, Italy's Jewish community antisemitism watchdog, there were 877 documented incidents of antisemitism in Italy in 2024, nearly double the 454 incidents recorded the year before. Supporters of the bill, including Victor Fadlun, president of the Jewish Community of Rome, argue that existing laws, including the Legge Mancino, which already criminalises hate speech and incitement to discrimination, are no longer sufficient to address the scale and sophistication of modern antisemitic expression, particularly online. For many in the Jewish community, the surge in incidents since the outbreak of the Gaza conflict in October 2023 has made legislative action feel urgent. For them, this bill represents not a threat to democracy but a belated defence of it. The central figure in the PD's internal rupture is Graziano Delrio, a former minister of transport, a doctor who completed his postgraduate specialisation in endocrinology with research stints in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel, and one of the most prominent senators in the party's reformist current. In late November 2025, Delrio presented a bill, drafted in personal dissent from his party group, that would incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) operational definition of antisemitism into Italian law. The move was immediately disowned by the PD leadership. Senate group president Francesco Boccia declared it a purely personal initiative that did not represent the position of the group or the party. But Delrio was far from alone. The bill was co-signed by ten other PD senators, including Simona Malpezzi, Alessandro Alfieri, Alfredo Bazoli, Pier Ferdinando Casini, Tatjana Rojc, Filippo Sensi, Valeria Valente, Walter Verini, Sandra Zampa, and Antonio Nicita. Shortly after, Andrea Martella and Beatrice Lorenzin also added their signatures. As of this week, Delrio has gone further still. Speaking to Il Foglio on February 27, he confirmed he will vote in favour of the bill when it reaches the Senate floor, citing meaningful concessions from the majority during the amendment process, including a softening of the IHRA reference and the dropping of both criminal sanctions and the proposed ban on demonstrations. Delrio's personal ties to Israel have become part of the debate. In May 2025, as university campuses across Italy were engulfed by protests demanding an end to academic cooperation with Israeli institutions, and as over a million people took to the streets in solidarity with Gaza, Delrio flew to Israel. He met with Israeli foreign minister Gideon Sa'ar and Knesset president Amir Ohana, and later described the meetings as "fruitful," saying he had shared his experience as a former minister and "suggested seeking solidarity and common actions." Critics, including writers at the progressive outlet Terzogiornale, have drawn a direct line between that visit, an Israeli university monitoring report identifying Italian campuses as hotbeds of anti-Israel activity, and the subsequent introduction of the bill just four days after the report's publication. The bill's articles 3 and 4 include a provision for an internal university official with the power to assess events and activities deemed to violate the IHRA definition, a mechanism that maps closely onto recommendations in the Israeli report. Delrio's supporters, and the senator himself, reject any suggestion of improper coordination. He is a prominent figure in Sinistra per Israele, an association founded in 1967 to maintain links between the Italian left and Israel, and his engagement with Israeli officials reflects longstanding personal and political convictions rather than any hidden agenda. His academic ties to Israel predate his political career by decades. The question of whether his bill is a response to Jewish communal pressure, to Israeli diplomatic lobbying, to a genuine rise in antisemitism, or to some combination of all three, is one on which reasonable people disagree, and one the parliamentary debate has not resolved. At the heart of the controversy is the IHRA operational definition of antisemitism, which has been adopted by 24 EU member states, the European Commission, and the European Parliament, and which the Italian government under Giuseppe Conte incorporated into a council of ministers resolution in January 2020. Elly Schlein herself voted in favour of the IHRA framework when she was a member of the European Parliament, a fact that PD reformists have been quick to recall. The definition identifies a set of examples of contemporary antisemitism, several of which extend into territory many activists and scholars consider legitimate political speech. These include claiming that the existence of the State of Israel is a form of racism, applying double standards to Israel by demanding behaviour not required of any other democratic state, and drawing comparisons between Israeli policy and Nazi conduct. Supporters say the definition is routinely misread. Noemi Di Segni, president of the Union of Italian Jewish Communities (UCEI), has stressed that the definition explicitly states that criticism of Israel similar to that directed at any other country cannot be considered antisemitic. PD vice-president of the European Parliament Pina Picierno has dismissed concerns as "instrumental criticisms that smack of justificationism and hypocrisy." Critics see it differently. AVS senator Peppe De Cristofaro has argued the bill places the fight against antisemitism on the same level as criticism of the Israeli government. His party colleague Angelo Bonelli warned that prominent Jewish voices including Anna Foa and Gad Lerner, who have publicly criticised Israeli state conduct, could theoretically fall within the law's scope. A group of Italian academics published an open letter calling the approach potentially "liberticidal." Both sides are making arguments that deserve to be taken seriously. Whether a law is needed, and what form it should take, are questions on which people of good faith hold irreconcilable positions. The bill is expected to reach the Senate floor imminently. Delrio and the PD reformists are likely to provide enough votes, alongside the governing majority and the centrist parties Italia Viva and Azione, to ensure passage. The PD leadership, represented by Boccia, attempted this week to block the scheduling of the floor vote and failed. If the law passes, Italy will become the first country in the world to criminalise antisemitic speech based on the IHRA definition. Whether that is a historic step forward in the fight against one of Europe's oldest hatreds, or a step toward a legal architecture that could be turned against legitimate dissent, may not be known until someone tests it in court. Ph: Teo K / Shutterstock.com