“Another antisemite gets promoted by Trudeau. Birju Dattani, known for perpetuating hate toward Jews, has been appointed chief of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.”
That was the charge leveled by Conservative MP Melissa Lantsman against Birju Dattani, a human rights scholar who was forced to resign as Canada’s Chief Human Rights Commissioner before even assuming office. In a matter of days, a coordinated smear campaign—led by Lantsman, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), and far-right media figure Ezra Levant—turned a respected legal academic into a political liability. The accusations were not based on any actual evidence of antisemitism, but rather on his past critiques of Israel’s policies, which were deliberately distorted to frame him as an extremist.
Dattani is pushing back with three defamation lawsuits against Lantsman, CIJA, and Levant, accusing them of distorting his record to ruin his career. His case is not just about clearing his name—it tests whether racialized voices can speak freely in Canada without being silenced.
The attacks on Dattani followed a well-worn script used to silence racialized and marginalized voices who challenge Western foreign policy, especially on Israel. The moment he was appointed, his academic work on Israel-Palestine, a 2015 panel discussion, and years-old social media posts were selectively weaponized to paint him as antisemitic. Accusations of extremism, antisemitism, or even terrorism sympathies are routinely deployed to discredit critics of Israeli policies, and Dattani became the latest casualty of this smear machine.
Yet, an independent investigation commissioned by Justice Minister Arif Virani found no basis for the allegations. The report unequivocally concluded:
“We cannot find that Mr. Dattani harboured or harbours any beliefs that would be characterized as antisemitic or that he has demonstrated any biases (conscious or unconscious) towards Jews or Israelis.”
The investigators even noted that his expertise on Israel/Palestine could have been an asset to his role. But that was irrelevant. Political pressure, a media frenzy, and manufactured outrage ensured his removal.
Dattani wasn’t just pushed out—he was made an example. His resignation delivers a stark warning: even legitimate human rights advocacy on Israel comes at a cost. The independent report noted that he had “downplayed the critical nature of his work,” a telling sign that he knew speaking too openly about Palestinian rights could end his career.
This chilling effect extends far beyond Dattani. Across Canada and beyond, academics, journalists, and public figures who criticize Israeli policies walk a tightrope. Simply advocating for Palestinian rights can trigger accusations of antisemitism, blacklisting, or resignation demands. The fear of being branded an extremist or security threat forces many to self-censor rather than risk their careers.
Dattani has made it clear that Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian bias fueled the attacks against him. He described being smeared with Islamophobic and anti-Arab tropes, portraying him as a terrorist sympathizer. The message was unmistakable: his Muslim identity, human rights advocacy, and criticism of Israel made him a target.
Unlike most targeted by such campaigns, Dattani is fighting back in court. His defamation lawsuits accuse Lantsman, CIJA, and Levant of knowingly spreading falsehoods, orchestrating his removal, and weaponizing defamation. A victory could set a crucial precedent, holding politicians and media figures accountable for reckless smears.
Dattani’s fight isn’t just about clearing his name—it’s about exposing a system where politicians and media figures can destroy careers without consequence. Few public figures ousted by coordinated smear campaigns push back. If he wins, it could spark a long-overdue reckoning on the weaponization of antisemitism to silence dissent on Israel/Palestine.
Dattani’s case highlights a tragic irony. While antisemitism is a serious issue, its weaponization against critics of Israel undermines efforts to combat real hate. Scholars warn that branding all criticism of Israel as antisemitic dilutes the term, making it harder to address actual threats to Jewish communities.
These attacks often come with Islamophobic undertones, casting Muslims, Arabs, and pro-Palestinian voices as inherently suspect. The same tactic has been used against figures like Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Marc Lamont Hill, who were branded antisemitic despite criticizing Israeli policies, not Jewish people.
Dattani’s case is a pivotal test for free speech in Canada. If a government-appointed human rights commissioner can be driven out by baseless accusations, it raises a stark question: who is truly allowed to participate in public life?
Even more troubling is the silence of institutions that should have defended Dattani. Human rights groups, universities, and political allies stayed quiet—not because they believed the accusations, but because defending him was too costly. That silence empowers smear campaigns to decide who holds power, who speaks freely, and who is safe in public life.
Now an unpaid senior fellow at Toronto Metropolitan University’s Centre for Free Expression, Dattani is crowdfunding to sustain his legal fight. The stark resource imbalance underscores how smear campaigns punish those who challenge establishment narratives while rewarding those who weaponize defamation.
If Dattani wins, it will send a clear message: public figures cannot engage in reckless character assassination without consequences. His case could embolden others who have been silenced by similar tactics and force Canada to confront a crucial question: Do we truly uphold free speech and human rights, or only when they align with establishment views?
The outcome will determine whether racialized professionals, Muslim voices, and pro-Palestinian advocates can participate in public life without fear of erasure. If Dattani loses, the message is just as clear: you can speak, but only if you stay silent on the wrong issues.
The real question now is whether this case will spark broader resistance—or if, once again, a racialized individual will be left to fight alone.
Birju Dattani is another one who can and will fight back. I’ll send him some money!