Zionist legal body chosen to solicit submissions to antisemitism Royal Commission
Picking Zionist legal service to provide advice risks politicising inquiry, critics warn
The Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department partnering with a pro-Zionist legal body to solicit public submissions to the Royal Commission into antisemitism risks jeopardising the inquiry’s independence, critics have warned.
In March, National Legal Aid – a confederation of the eight state and territory-based legal aid bodies – announced the formation of the National Legal Advice Service (NALS), a legal information and support body providing “independent, trauma-informed and culturally safe legal advice to members of the public” considering making a submission to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. On April 21, the Commission advised subscribers to its email list that “National Legal Aid and the Jewish Centre for Law and Justice are now both operating the National Legal Advice Service”.
However, the JCLJ’s history of Zionist legal and political activity, the vocally pro-Israel stance of many of its leadership, its small size and low public profile have raised red flags with advocacy groups.
It is not the first time that questions have been raised about the Attorney-General’s Department providing pro-Israel legal bodies with access to the inner workings of the Commission. Last week Michael West Media revealed that the Department had appointed law firm Gilbert + Tobin, a major sponsor of the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce, as lawyers assisting the Commission without an open tender process.
We can’t publish investigations like this without the support of our readers. Buy a paid subscription to support Deepcut today.
Who is the JCLJ?
For an organisation chosen to co-run the submissions process for a high-profile royal commission, the JCLJ has a remarkably low profile. While some information can be found on its public ACNC listing, the JCLJ’s website contains no information about its board, executive leadership or employees, its sources of funding or other support, a physical or mailing address, or contact information for general enquiries. The JCLJ also appears to have no social media presence.
What information exists appears to indicate a very small and largely volunteer-run group. The JCLJ’s most recent Annual Information Statement listed a $470,320 donation as its sole source of income. It also listed just $34,919 in employee expenses, including salaries, for the 2024-25 financial year. In a March interview on Melbourne community radio station 3ZZZ, JCLJ director Marc Felman KC said the JCLJ had four lawyers on staff, as well as an informal network of pro bono lawyers and volunteers.
In response to questions, an Attorney General’s Department spokesperson said the department “considered JCLJ’s capacity, capability, and governance mechanisms against selection criteria’, and that it “is satisfied that the core probity and transparency principles have been adhered to”.
Pro-Zionist legal campaigning
The JCLJ’s public ACNC listing names five directors, one board member, one public officer and one ‘responsible person’ in an undefined role (likely a treasurer). They include figures such as:
Peter Hersh OAM, a chartered accountant who has sat on the board of governors of Technion – Israel Institute of Technology since 2012;
Director Keren Miller, a senior legal counsel at Australia Post and principal solicitor at Prosperity Law who has claimed on her LinkedIn page that Palestinian-Australian author Randa Abdel-Fattah “called for ‘an end to Israel’ aka the wiping out of 8 million Jews”; and
Director Anthony Small, the custodian of the Millie Phillips Jewish Education Fund, which has funded “countless trips to Israel and enabling children to go to Zionist youth camps”.
The JCLJ’s Zionist and pro-Israel leanings go beyond the personal political opinions of its directors and board members. In the March radio interview, Felman revealed the JCLJ provided legal assistance to Menachem Vorchheimer’s successful lawsuit asserting that the phrase “all Zionists are terrorists” breaches hate speech laws.
Felman also admitted that the JCLJ “coordinated, funded and supported” a joint effort by the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry to assist NSW Police’s successful October 2025 appeal for a prohibition order banning a planned pro-Palestinian march to the Sydney Opera House.
In January, the Zionist Federation of Australia (ZFA) listed the JCLJ alongside the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, the Australia/Israel Jewish Affairs Council, the Dor Foundation and the ZFA itself as organisations working “to ensure a unified and strategic approach” toward the Commission.
Dr Wesam Charkawi, a spokesperson for Muslim Australian advocacy organisation The Muslim Vote, said the Commission’s partnership with the JCLJ “raises serious questions for the Attorney General’s Department and the Royal Commission”.
“An organisation whose directors and affiliates have taken strong public positions on Zionism, Palestine, protest activity and issues likely to arise before the Commission should not be placed in a role connected to public participation without clear safeguards. This is a matter that goes directly to public confidence in the process,” Charkawi said.
“If the Commission, or departments connected to it, are directing members of the public toward a legal support service partly run by an advocacy body that has already been active in litigation, public commentary and coordinated efforts around antisemitism, Zionism and Palestine, the public is entitled to ask how independence is being protected, and how any actual or perceived conflicts are being managed.”
The Department did not directly answer questions as to how the JCLJ or NALS will respond to potential submissions that conflate antisemitism with criticism of the state of Israel or the genocide in Gaza.
“While both NLA and JCLJ are available to provide free legal information, help and advice, they are independent of one another and individuals can choose to engage with each service accordingly,” the Department spokesperson said.
“Members of the public can also engage with the Royal Commission directly, with information and evidence being collected through public and private hearings, interviews, and submissions.”
The JCLJ did not respond to questions.
Check out the latest Deepthink episode with Lebanese-American journalist Rania Khalek, where we go deep on the war in Lebanon. Watch or listen on YouTube, Spotify, Apple or your preferred podcast platform with this RSS feed.
Full transparency absolutely crucial for the submission process if the findings of this Royal Commission are to be respected