Notes from an information evening for communal organisations, presented by The Honourable Ronald Sackville AO KC, the former Chair of the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability
 

In summary, His Honour Sackville explained that The Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion will be led by former High Court Justice Virginia Bell AC, who will set the inquiry’s processes and deliver its findings independently under the Letters Patent issued on 9 January 2026. The Royal Commission operates strictly within the mandate set out in its Letters Patent which define the scope of its inquiry and the matters which it is authorised to investigate.
 
The Commissioner will be supported by Counsel Assisting (Junior and Senior) who will be responsible for gathering and testing evidence, questioning witnesses, and ensuring all relevant information comes before the inquiry - without representing any party.
 
Community members who are asked to participate may be provided with assistance in accessing legal resources and advice by the Commission to help prepare submissions or appear at hearings. It might be that the Jewish Centre for Law & Justice (JCLJ) may offer the Commission to provide that legal support to and on behalf of the Jewish community.
 
It is important to note that: 

1. Not everyone who makes a submission to the Commission will be called to give evidence before a hearing. Anyone who makes a submission about their experiences of antisemitism should ensure they are clear and concise. 

2. Unlike a court, the Commission uses a more flexible, investigative approach and isn’t bound by the strict rules of evidence which exist in other Courts, allowing it to more thoroughly investigate systemic issues. 

The drawbacks of a Royal Commission:

• Anybody who believes they have been affected by antisemitism or the “antisemitism discussion” is entitled to make submissions to the Commission. This will mean that specific groups cannot be stopped from making submissions to the Royal Commission. That said it does not mean that such groups will be called to give evidence at any hearings, and if they are that they will not be controlled and/or appropriately questioned. 

• Without formal evidentiary rules or the protections of an adversarial process, people may feel that allegations or inferences are not tested as rigorously as they would be in court, potentially affecting reputations. 

• Commissions can only make recommendations. Even though they can uncover major issues, governments are not required to implement their findings, which can undermine confidence in the process. 

• Royal Commissions often take years and absorb significant public resources, attracting criticism if outcomes are delayed or not acted upon. 

• The freedom to investigate widely can result in diffuse inquiries where attention shifts across many issues, potentially diluting the clarity of findings. 

• Because procedures are set by the Commission itself rather than fixed legal rules, experiences of fairness may differ between witnesses or topics. 

• Although fully independent in its work, the Commission does rely on Commonwealth funding to operate throughout the inquiry period. Should the enquiry run out of resources during the inquiry period then it will be reliant on the Federal Government of the day to approve the provision of additional funding to conclude the inquiry.