Introduction

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most complex and emotionally charged conflicts of our time. Protecting human rights remains essential—for everyone involved. Yet international engagement with this conflict is often shaped not by objectivity, but by political power struggles, bias, and polarization.

Francesca Albanese, who has served since 2022 as the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, is emblematic of this dynamic. Her repeated statements and public conduct raise important questions: How neutral can anyone truly be in such a politicized role? Where is the line between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitic delegitimization? And what responsibility do organizations like Amnesty International bear when they platform such individuals?

A particularly disturbing example of this imbalance in international human rights advocacy was Amnesty’s glorification of Palestinian prisoner Walid Daqqah in March 2024. While Daqqah had brutally kidnapped, tortured, and murdered a young Israeli reservist, Amnesty presented him solely as a suffering poet—without ever mentioning his crimes or the victims. This kind of one-sided portrayal not only undermines the credibility of these organizations but also deeply wounds many Jewish people who still hope for genuine, impartial human rights advocacy.

As a Jewish person myself, I can no longer place trust in Amnesty, the United Nations, or other international NGOs when they fail to confront antisemitism clearly and honestly—or to examine their own biases. This article offers a sober, factual analysis of Francesca Albanese’s controversial role, her public statements, the criticism she has received, and the broader implications for Amnesty, the UN, and public discourse—especially here in Switzerland.

A Critical Analysis of Francesca Albanese’s Role and Amnesty International’s Responsibility

From the start, Francesca Albanese’s appointment as UN Special Rapporteur was controversial. She is not the first person in this role to be accused of bias against Israel—but she is the first to face such broad condemnation from democratic states like France, Germany, Canada, and the United States, who explicitly called out her antisemitic remarks. Major Jewish organizations—including the World Jewish Congress (WJC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), and UN Watch—accuse her not only of lacking neutrality but of actively spreading antisemitic tropes and downplaying terrorism.

The Allegations: Antisemitic Tropes and Holocaust Comparisons

Albanese’s documented statements range from older Facebook posts to speeches made during her time in office. Particularly troubling are:

• Her claim that the U.S. is “subjugated by the Jewish lobby”—a classic antisemitic power narrative.
• Her comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany, describing Gaza as the “largest concentration camp of the 21st century” and accusing Israel of following “purity laws.”
• Her response to the Hamas massacre on October 7, 2023, which she refused to recognize as antisemitic, instead framing it as a “response to Israeli oppression.”
• Her participation in events linked to Hamas-affiliated organizations, where she spoke of the “right to resist”—a phrase that, in this context, is widely understood as an apology for terror attacks.
• Her repeated trivializations of the Holocaust, reducing the murder of millions of Jews to a mere backdrop for criticizing present-day Israeli policies.

These are not examples of sharp criticism of Israeli policy. They cross the line into antisemitic demonization of Israel and its supporters—as defined by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism. Albanese uses classic antisemitic motifs: conspiracy theories, accusations of greed and power, and Holocaust distortions.

The UN’s Response: Structural Blindness Instead of Accountability

Most alarming is the fact that the UN Human Rights Council renewed Albanese’s mandate in April 2025 without addressing these allegations. Internal reviews led nowhere, critical reports were dismissed, and formal complaints were ignored. Instead of distancing itself from hate speech and partisanship, the UNHRC protected its rapporteur—blatantly disregarding its own standards of neutrality, human dignity, and anti-discrimination.

This reflects a deeper structural problem: the Special Rapporteur mandate for the occupied Palestinian territories is designed to investigate only Israeli actions, not Palestinian human rights violations. This built-in bias attracts candidates who have no intention of being impartial. Francesca Albanese is not an exception—she is the extreme result of this structural flaw.

Amnesty International: Complicity Through Bias

Amnesty International, which hosted Albanese at several events in Switzerland, bears part of the responsibility for amplifying her views. In recent years, Amnesty itself has been widely criticized for one-sided reports on Israel—most notably its 2022 report labeling Israel an “apartheid state” without differentiating between Israel proper and the occupied territories.

When Amnesty places someone like Albanese on its stage—without any balancing voices—it actively contributes to the normalization of antisemitic narratives. This undermines Amnesty’s own credibility as a supposedly impartial human rights organization. Those who cite Albanese uncritically adopt not only her human rights concerns but also her distortions and prejudices.

Sidebar: Amnesty International – Between Human Rights Advocacy and Anti-Israel Bias

Amnesty International has been one of the world’s most influential human rights organizations since its founding in 1961. But when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Amnesty has repeatedly issued deeply one-sided and at times polemical reports on Israel. Its 2022 accusation of “apartheid” triggered global controversy.

Critics argue that Amnesty fails to distinguish sufficiently between Israeli government policies and the complex realities on the ground. Moreover, the organization often ignores the historical and antisemitic context in which much anti-Israel rhetoric operates.

A striking example is Amnesty’s treatment of Palestinian prisoner Walid Daqqah. In March 2024, Amnesty launched a campaign calling for his release, portraying him as a suffering poet and prisoner. What Amnesty omitted: Daqqah was convicted for kidnapping a young Israeli reservist at a bus stop, torturing him for days, castrating him alive, and finally executing him. Daqqah later smuggled his semen out of prison to impregnate his wife.

Presenting Daqqah solely as a victim, without acknowledging his horrific crime, shows just how selectively Amnesty sometimes frames its narratives. This distorts the conflict and turns perpetrators into martyrs.

When Amnesty now invites a figure like Albanese—whose antisemitic rhetoric has been widely condemned—it puts its own credibility as an independent human rights body at risk. There is a real danger that legitimate criticism of Israeli policy becomes inseparable from antisemitic conspiracy theories.

Human rights advocacy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must always be conducted with sensitivity and balance. It must never violate respect for Jewish history and identity—and must hold all sides equally accountable.

Responsible Criticism of Israel Is Essential

Let it be clear: Israel’s occupation policies in the West Bank, its settlement expansion, and its systematic discrimination against Palestinians deserve criticism. This criticism is necessary and legitimate.

But it must not slide into antisemitic clichés, Holocaust distortions, or the trivialization of terror. Albanese systematically erases the context of Israeli self-defense while presenting Palestinian violence as an inevitable response. In doing so, she becomes a voice for those who seek Israel’s destruction, not peace.

The Responsibility of Universities and Civil Society

The University of Bern rightly canceled a planned event with Albanese due to the lack of balanced perspectives. This was not a capitulation to the “Israel lobby” but a necessary defense of academic integrity and intellectual honesty. Open debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is essential—but it must be pluralistic and reject antisemitic narratives.

Conclusion: Albanese Is Part of the Problem, Not the Solution

Francesca Albanese presents herself as a human rights defender. But her rhetoric violates core human rights values: the equal worth of Jewish life, the memory of the Holocaust, and Israel’s right to security. She delegitimizes Jewish history, mocks Jewish suffering, and justifies violence. Her appointment and renewal at the UN represent a moral failure of the international system.

Those who cite Albanese without questioning her bias and antisemitism are blind to the complexity of the conflict—and weaken the struggle for human rights instead of strengthening it.

A Personal Note

It is painful to watch organizations we once trusted to defend human rights take such one-sided positions in this sensitive conflict—ignoring the legitimate fears and historical traumas of Jewish people. Glorifying perpetrators and downplaying antisemitic violence casts a long shadow over the credibility of Amnesty, the UN, and other international institutions.

As a Jew, this loss of trust is not an abstract critique but a deeply personal experience. It’s about acknowledging suffering on all sides—and resisting the ideological distortion that undermines real human rights work and fuels hatred instead of understanding.

I hope we remain vigilant, hold human rights organizations accountable, and foster a debate that neither suppresses legitimate criticism of Israel nor excuses antisemitic hatred. Only then can we rebuild trust—in the hope of a more just and peaceful future.

Sources

• UN Watch:
  The Geneva-based NGO published a 60-page report in 2024 titled „Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing,“ documenting numerous antisemitic statements by Francesca Albanese as well as alleged ethical and financial misconduct. UN Watch criticizes the United Nations for its lack of willingness to investigate these issues.
• Anti-Defamation League (ADL):
  The ADL has compiled detailed evidence of Albanese’s antisemitic tropes, Holocaust distortions, and her downplaying of the October 7, 2023 massacre. The organization points to clear violations of the UN Code of Conduct and calls for her removal from office.
• World Jewish Congress (WJC):
  The WJC appealed to the President of the UN Human Rights Council to block the renewal of Albanese’s mandate. It warns that her statements and conduct severely undermine the credibility of the United Nations.
• American Jewish Committee (AJC Europe):
  In an open letter, the AJC criticized Albanese’s lack of neutrality and her association with extremist groups, including Hamas-affiliated organizations. The committee urged UN member states to oppose the renewal of her mandate.
• Jerusalem Post:
  The Israeli newspaper reported on the allegations raised by UN Watch and the international reactions to Albanese’s statements. It summarized the controversies surrounding her public comments, her participation in Hamas-affiliated events, and alleged financial irregularities.
• The Case of Walid Daqqah (own research):
  In March 2024, Amnesty International honored Palestinian prisoner Walid Daqqah as a poet and political detainee, without mentioning that he had been convicted for the brutal kidnapping, torture, and murder of an Israeli reservist.