Italy's Senate approved a bill on March 4, 2026, formally adopting the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of antisemitism into Italian law. The bill now faces a final vote in the Chamber of Deputies on October 2, 2026. If it passes, Italy becomes the first country to write the IHRA definition directly into binding national legislation, not just a government resolution, as several other countries have done. The vote has split the Partito Democratico internally, with six senators defying their own party's abstention to vote yes, and the party now leaning toward an outright No in the Chamber.What the Bill Actually DoesThe bill's central and most contested provision is Article 1, which adopts the IHRA's 2016 operational definition of antisemitism, along with the set of illustrative examples that accompany it. Those examples include describing Israel's existence as inherently racist, applying standards to Israel that aren't demanded of other democratic states, and drawing comparisons between Israeli state policy and Nazi conduct. The bill also includes provisions for training programs for teachers and students, and coordinated measures against online hate speech, though an earlier, more controversial provision allowing university officials to formally flag events as violating the IHRA definition was removed from the final Senate text after criticism from across the political spectrum, including from within Fratelli d'Italia. Formally, the bill was proposed by Massimiliano Romeo, the Lega's Senate group leader, but it absorbed proposals from several parties, including Forza Italia's Maurizio Gasparri, Italia Viva's Ivan Scalfarotto, and PD senator Graziano Delrio, whose own personal bill in November 2025 set off the broader controversy. Why Supporters Say It's Needed Backers point to hard numbers. According to the CDEC Foundation, Italy's Jewish community antisemitism watchdog, documented antisemitic incidents in Italy nearly doubled, from 454 in 2023 to 877 in 2024. Victor Fadlun, president of the Jewish Community of Rome, has argued that existing hate-speech law, the Legge Mancino, no longer adequately addresses the scale and sophistication of modern antisemitic expression, particularly online. The Union of Italian Jewish Communities (UCEI) welcomed the Senate's approval, calling it a win for civil society broadly, not just the Jewish community, and crediting both majority and opposition lawmakers for reaching a workable text. Noemi Di Segni, UCEI's president, has pushed back specifically on the claim that the IHRA definition chills political speech, stressing it explicitly states that criticism of Israel comparable to criticism of any other state isn't antisemitic. Why Critics Say It Goes Too Far Opponents focus almost entirely on the IHRA definition's illustrative examples, not the concept of fighting antisemitism itself. AVS senator Peppe De Cristofaro has argued the bill effectively places criticism of Israeli government policy on the same legal footing as antisemitism. His colleague Angelo Bonelli has warned the law could theoretically be used against prominent Jewish critics of Israeli policy, including historian Anna Foa and journalist Gad Lerner. A group of Italian academics signed an open letter describing the approach as potentially "liberticidal." Inside the PD, senator Andrea Giorgis, who authored the party's own alternative text focused on the Council of Europe's broader hate-speech definition rather than the IHRA's, framed the party's Senate abstention as driven by genuine solidarity with Jewish citizens who've faced real violence and real fear, not as indifference to antisemitism. The PD's Internal Fracture The bill has done more damage inside the center-left than anywhere else in Italian politics. Senate group leader Francesco Boccia initially disowned Delrio's November 2025 bill as a purely personal initiative with no party backing. Despite that, when the bill reached the Senate floor in March, six PD senators, Delrio, Filippo Sensi, Walter Verini, Alfredo Bazoli, Pier Ferdinando Casini and Sandra Zampa, broke from their own party's abstention to vote yes. Carlo Calenda, leader of the centrist Azione party, called the PD's institutional abstention absurd and unjust, given how closely the final Senate text tracked Delrio's own original proposal. That fracture hasn't healed heading into the Chamber vote. As of late September, the PD looked set to move from abstention to an outright No vote on October 2, prompting Delrio to describe himself as "amareggiato", embittered, insisting the left should never find itself voting against legislation protecting a minority group. Elly Schlein has conditioned any PD support on further changes to how the IHRA definition is applied, while the party's reformist wing considers that position a strategic and moral mistake. The Israel Question Delrio's personal ties to Israel have become part of the political argument against him. In May 2025, as Italian university campuses saw large protests calling for cutting academic ties with Israeli institutions, Delrio traveled to Israel and met with Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar and Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, later describing the meetings as productive. Critics at outlets including Terzogiornale have pointed to the timing between that trip, an Israeli university monitoring report describing Italian campuses as hubs of anti-Israel activity, and Delrio's bill, introduced shortly after. Delrio and his supporters reject any suggestion of coordination, noting his involvement with Sinistra per Israele, a left-wing pro-Israel association founded in 1967, and his decades-long personal and academic ties to Israel predate his political career entirely. Frequently Asked Questions Has Italy's antisemitism bill already passed? Partially. The Senate approved it on March 4, 2026 (105 in favor, 24 against, 21 abstentions). It now needs final approval from the Chamber of Deputies, with a vote expected October 2, 2026. What is the IHRA definition of antisemitism? It's a working definition adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in 2016, now used by 24 EU member states, the European Commission and European Parliament. It defines antisemitism broadly as a certain perception of Jews that can manifest as hatred, and includes a list of illustrative examples, some involving criticism of Israel, that have proven the most contested part of the framework. Did Italy already recognize the IHRA definition before this bill? Yes, in part. Giuseppe Conte's government formally adopted the IHRA definition via a Council of Ministers resolution in January 2020. This bill would be the first time it's written directly into binding legislation rather than a non-binding government resolution. Why is the Democratic Party split over this bill? The party's leadership and most senators see the IHRA's illustrative examples as risking the conflation of legitimate criticism of Israeli government policy with antisemitism itself. A reformist minority, led by Graziano Delrio, argues the party's hesitation reflects a longstanding reluctance within parts of the Italian left to take a clear stand against rising antisemitism. Would this bill criminalize criticism of Israel? That's the central dispute, and reasonable people land on opposite sides. Supporters, including UCEI, say the IHRA definition explicitly protects criticism of Israel equivalent to criticism of any other state. Critics, including AVS lawmakers and some academics, argue the definition's own illustrative examples make that distinction difficult to apply consistently in practice. The bill's final text dropped an earlier, more aggressive mechanism that would have let university officials formally flag events under the IHRA definition. Ph: pcruciatti / Shutterstock.com