Case Description
Due to a technical glitch, our public comments portal for cases related to the "From the River to the Sea" phrase closed earlier than planned. To ensure everyone has a chance to share their input, we've reopened it for 24 hours. The portal will now close at 12pm BST on May 23rd.
These three cases concern content decisions made by Meta, all on Facebook, which the Oversight Board intends to address together.
The three posts were shared by different users in November 2023, following the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7 and the start of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Each post contains the phrase “From the river to the sea.” All three were reported by users for violating Meta’s Community Standards. The company decided to leave all three posts on Facebook. For each case, the Board will decide whether the content should be removed under Meta’s policies and according to its human rights responsibilities. Numbers of views and reports are correct as of the end of February 2024.
The first case concerns a comment from a Facebook user on another user’s video. The video has a caption encouraging others to “speak up” with numerous hashtags including “#ceasefire” and “#freepalestine.” The comment on the post contains the phrase “FromTheRiverToTheSea” in hashtag form, as well as several additional hashtags including “#DefundIsrael.” The comment had about 3,000 views and was reported seven times by four users. The reports were closed after Meta’s automated systems did not send them for human review within 48 hours.
In the second case, a Facebook user posted what appears to be a generated image of fruit floating on the sea that form the words from the phrase, along with “Palestine will be free.” The post had about 8 million views and was reported 951 times by 937 users. The first report on the post was closed, again because Meta’s automated systems did not send it for human review within 48 hours. Subsequent reports by users were reviewed and assessed as non-violating by human moderators.
In the third case, a Facebook page reshared a post from the page of a community organization in Canada in which a statement from the “founding members” of the organization declared support for “the Palestinian people,” condemning their “senseless slaughter” by the “Zionist State of Israel” and “Zionist Israeli occupiers.” The post ends with the phrase “From The River To The Sea.” This post had less than 1,000 views and was reported by one user. The report was automatically closed.
The Facebook users who reported the content, and subsequently appealed Meta’s decisions to leave up the content to the Board, claimed the phrase was breaking Meta’s rules on Hate Speech, Violence and Incitement or Dangerous Organizations and Individuals. The user who reported the content in the first case stated that the phrase violates Meta’s policies prohibiting content that promotes violence or supports terrorism. The users who reported the content in the second and third cases stated that the phrase constitutes hate speech, is antisemitic and is a call to abolish the state of Israel.
After the Board selected these cases for review, Meta confirmed its original decisions were correct. Meta informed the Board that it analyzed the content under three policies – Violence and Incitement, Hate Speech and Dangerous Organizations and Individuals – and found the posts did not violate any of these policies. Meta explained the company is aware that “From the river to the sea” has a long history and that it had reviewed use of the phrase on its platform after October 7, 2023. After that review, Meta determined that, without additional context, it cannot conclude that “From the river to the sea” constitutes a call to violence or a call for exclusion of any particular group, nor that it is linked exclusively to support for Hamas.
The Board selected these cases to consider how Meta should moderate the use of the phrase given the resurgence in its use after October 7, 2023, and controversies around the phrase’s meaning. On the one hand, the phrase has been used to advocate for the dignity and human rights of Palestinians. On the other hand, it could have antisemitic implications, as claimed by the users who submitted the cases to the Board. This case falls within the Board’s strategic priority of Crisis and Conflict Situations.
The Board would appreciate public comments that address:
- The origin and current uses of the phrase: “From the river to the sea.”
- Research into online trends in content using the phrase.
- Research into any associated online and offline harms from the use of the phrase.
- Meta’s human rights responsibilities in relation to content using the phrase including freedom of expression, freedom of association, and equality and non-discrimination.
- State and institutional (e.g., university) responses to the use of the phrase (e.g., during protests) and the human rights impacts of those responses.
As part of its decisions, the Board can issue policy recommendations to Meta. While recommendations are not binding, Meta must respond to them within 60 days. As such, the Board welcomes public comments proposing recommendations that are relevant to these cases.
Comments
Antisemitism. From the river to the see essentially means willingly killing or exporting all Jewish people from their country.
Palestinians come from all of the land "between the river and the sea," not only the West Bank and Gaza. Israel's discriminatory treatment of Palestinians who have Israeli citizenship is well-documented. Here is only one example from Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/03/30/israel-new-laws-marginalize-palestinian-arab-citizens
"From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is a demand for freedom for all Palestinians, including Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship and live in Israel. Palestinians want to live free in their homeland, with equal rights.
Israel and its supporters object to this slogan because Israel cannot tolerate equality for Palestinians. Israel's supporters maintain that Jews cannot be safe without a Jewish state, and a Jewish state requires a Jewish majority. There cannot be a Jewish majority in the land that Palestinians come from without the violence, dispossession, displacement and discrimination that Israel has carried out since its founding. Israel is a racist state.
I am Jewish, and I was taught growing up to support Israel. I'm now a member of a Jewish U.S. organization Jewish Voice for Peace, which has tons of thousands of Jewish members, and which supports "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free."
Palestinians come from all of Palestine, and no one has the right to deny their human rights, force them to leave, or deny them the same self-determination that all people deserve. Israel's supporters want to ban Palestinians' freedom slogan because they can't tolerate equal rights for Palestinians. I urge you not to implement this racist ban infringing on Facebook users' freedom of speech.
Support for Palestinians can co-exist with support for Israelis. There is a "two-state solution" where both nations exist and are autonomous. We can separate calls to stop Israel's assault on Gaza from calls to eradicate the state of Israel.
““From the river to the sea” as used by pro-Palestinian persons is a historic chant for the freedom and liberation of the Palestinian people. Without additional context, the chant on its own cannot be considered hateful. With contest, it is referencing the desire to see the freedom of the Palestinian people, who historically have lived for generations between the Jordanian River and Mediterranean Sea who are under occupation, subject to apartheid and an ongoing genocide. To see freedom for the Palestinians does not require, mean, infer any harm to Israelis. It could look like a two state solution or a one state with democracy.
PM Netanyahu has used this same phrase to describe his political ambitions to occupy all of Palestine - are his words hateful/anti-Semitic? He is currently attempting to give effect to those words. The Likud Party's charter uses the phrase "from the river to the sea" -- is that anti-Semitic?
The obvious answer would be no, because the entire purpose of restricting/condemning the use of this phrase is ensure there is no language to even speak on the oppression of the Palestinian people. That is more divisive, harmful, and demeaning than a simple chant.
When protesters use the statement, it does not mean eradicating Israel. To me, it simply means wanting freedom for Palestinians who are suffering and being brutally tortured and killed. Freedom for all Palestinians including those living across all the land no matter what it is called. It is about wanting peace so all the people can finally have the freedom to live a normal life without fear and pain.
Freedom for Palestinians does not mean the genocide of Jewish people. It is not meant to be antisemitic at all and should not be twisted to mean something it is not. It is not meant to be harmful.
The statement "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is an invocation of Palestinian freedom and justice in response to the occupation, genocide, ethnic cleansing, and other mass suffering that they have experienced at the hands of the colonial campaign of Israel and its imperial backers in the form of the UK and the US, among other contributing powers, for the last 76 years. It does not threaten Jewish people (especially seeing as Jewish Palestinians exist) or Israelis as a whole, but the ~idea~ of the colonial project of Israel as a state founded on the supremacy of Zionist settlers over the native Palestinian population. It instead calls for a Palestine where Muslims, Jews, Christians, historic Palestinians and non-Palestinians alike can live in peace, safety, justice, and equality. The slogan is also used in opposition to the colonial fantasies of some Zionists that would see Israel extend throughout the entirety of occupied Palestine and beyond, denying the rights and sovereignty of not only Palestinians, but Lebanese, Jordanians, Egyptians, and others.
If analogy is helpful, I would liken "from the river to the sea" to have a similar meaning to the "land back" slogan of many indigenous people and tribes of Turtle Island, in opposition to the history of genocide and colonization they themselves have experienced at the hands of the "United States" (an empire which, to this day, attempts to override the sovereignty and rights of indigenous peoples). It is not a call for mass death, but for mass flourishing. It is a call to upend the ~systems~ that oppress us all whether we are aware of that oppression or not.
If you choose to censor Palestinians in this way, you will be making a grave mistake in the eyes of history, only furthering the subjugation and destruction of an already extensively oppressed people. Please choose to be on the side of justice and liberation.
The phrase "from the river to the sea" has not incited violence in the past months of the Israeli attacks on Gaza. But violence has been conducted by those who oppose the phrase. CNN reported on May 16 that attackers of university encampments full of peaceful protestors at UCLA 3 weeks ago, were pro-Israel. On the question of antisemitism, the Hillel at UCLA said these people are "fringe members of the off-campus Jewish community... harming Jewish students".
Other incidents of real world violence are the drivers who ran into pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia, Portland State, and in Minneapolis.
2 of these 3 cases demonstrate the aggression of the anti-Palestnians who reported the posts and appealed the rulings. I urge Meta to work with law enforcement closely to watch these social media accounts closely for violations of community standards.
65% of students, and 70% of the general population here in the US, support the idea of stopping the attack on Gaza (intelligent.com) which is what the phrase means. These protestors have remained peaceful (ACLED Brief, 10 May 2024). Its proponents have not advocated any action against Jews. Their opponent is the recognized war criminal Netanyahu and those members of his government who still believe in aggression. This is not antisemitism.
Thank you for your time and attention.
This proposal in action would be an affront to free speech, that would disproportionately penalize Palestinians and their allies while not meaningfully protecting Jewish people from actual antisemitism. If the platform is no longer a safe space to raise awareness and support for a population which is actively suffering under occupation, ethnic cleansing, and plausible genocide (as ruled by the International Court of Justice), then it is simply not a platform that I or my colleagues and peers will be using.
The International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists (IJL) is an international non-governmental organization comprising legal practitioners and academic jurists from across the globe, striving to advance human rights for all, including by combatting antisemitism, racism, Holocaust denial, and the delegitimization of the State of Israel. As such, IJL submits the following comments addressing the use of the phrase - ”From the River to the Sea Palestine Will be Free” - an antisemitic slogan inherently calling for the annihilation of the Jewish State of Israel.
This frequently used phrase and rallying cry, also circulates widely on social media, and is to be found on various items available online (including flags, mugs and sweatshirts).
“From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free” is a call for the destruction of Israel, as used in the 2017 Hamas Charter(1) (paragraph 20), Hamas being a terrorist organization designated as such by the USA, Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan, the UK and Israel. It is the most popular well-known rally chant in the context of the post-October 7 atrocities committed by Hamas-led terrorists in southern Israel. It is a call for Palestinian control over the entire territory of Israel, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. In other words, it is a call to eradicate and clear the land of Israel from the Jewish people and cause the end of the existence of the state of Israel, replacing it with a Palestinian state.
Importantly, it is not a call for a two-state solution but an antisemitic charge denying the Jewish right to self-determination, which is recognized by IHRA Definition as one of the examples of contemporary antisemitism. It thus amounts to a hate speech, that creates an environment of intimidation, as defined in META’s own hate speech policy.
Usage of this phrase results in making members of the Jewish and Israeli communities feel unsafe, hated, and ostracized.
Many Jews consider the slogan as threatening and harming (2) their sense of security, being a call not only for the elimination of the state of Israel, but also of its Jewish population. It is a slogan associated with terrorist groups that committed genocidal atrocities against the Jews.
There have been multiple examples of legal actions being taken against its presence and spreading in public, including: decision (3) (ref. 2 S 496/24) of April 3rd, 2023 of the Baden-Württemberg Administrative Court (Germany), upholding the ban on using the slogan issued by the city of Freiburg. The administration of the city allowed for the pro-Palestinian demonstration under the condition that the slogan was not to be used either verbally or in writing in German or in other languages. As justification, it referred to the slogan's criminal implications as a Hamas trademark; a motion (4) calling to ban the slogan, adopted by the Dutch parliament; a ban (5) by the Vienna police on a pro-Palestinian protest, citing the fact the phrase "from the river to the sea" was mentioned in invitations and characterizing it as a call to violence; Berlin public prosecutor's decision (6) to make the utterance of the slogan a criminal offense, as it is a call for the erasure of Israel. The German Ministry of Justice also announced (7) publicly in May 2024 that "From the river to the sea" is a Hamas slogan and depending on the circumstances of the individual case, the use of the slogan may therefore constitute propaganda of a banned organization which in turn is punishable by law.
Importantly, the slogan should be qualified as violating META’s own hate speech policy, where hate speech is defined as a direct attack against people on the basis of their protected characteristics, including race, ethnicity, national origin or religious affiliation. The „attack” is defined by META as „violent or dehumanising speech, harmful stereotypes, statements of inferiority, expressions of contempt, disgust or dismissal, cursing and calls for exclusion or segregation.” Regarding the „segregation and exclusion” elements, it is stated that it is not acceptable to publish „Content targeting a person or group of people on the basis of their protected characteristic(s) with (…): exclusion in the form of calls for action, statements of intent, aspirational or conditional statements, or statements advocating or supporting, defined as:
- Explicit exclusion, which means things such as expelling certain groups or saying that they are not allowed.
- Political exclusion, which means denying the right to political participation.
- Economic exclusion, which means denying access to economic entitlements and limiting participation in the labour market.
- Social exclusion, which means things such as denying access to spaces (physical and online) and social services, except for gender-based exclusion in health and positive support groups.”
The slogan „From the River to the Sea Palestine Will be Free” refers to the total exclusion and eradication of the Jewish people from the given territory. It should be thus understood as referring to all forms of exclusion listed above and, in fact, constituting a call for a much more aggreviating and profound form of exclusion of a clearly identified group, targeted on the basis of their protected characteristics.
Additionally, also as stated in the META’s policy, users should not post „Content attacking concepts, institutions, ideas, practices or beliefs associated with protected characteristics, which are likely to contribute to imminent physical harm, intimidation or discrimination against the people associated with that protected characteristic.” While assessing such content, META looks, among other factors, at „whether there is a period of heightened tension such as an election or ongoing conflict; and whether there is a recent history of violence against the targeted protected group.” Undoubtedly, the slogan calling for the end of the existence of a state that is inextricably linked with the Jewish people, a slogan associated with a terrorist organization, and disseminated during the time of the ongoing conflict and enormous tension and antisemitic hatred and violence, meets the conditions defined in the policy.
(1) https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hamas-2017-document-of-general-principles-and-policies?utm_content=cmp-true
(2) https://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-hamas-sentiment-shocks-european-jews-rekindling-fears-about-their-future/
(3) https://www.lto.de/recht/nachrichten/n/vg-freiburg-vgh-mannheim-palaestina-demonstration-demo-parole-river-to-sea-hamas/
(4) https://eurojewcong.org/news/communities-news/the-netherlands/motion-calling-to-ban-from-the-river-to-the-sea-slogan-adopted-in-dutch-parliament/
(5) https://www.reuters.com/world/from-river-sea-prompts-vienna-ban-pro-palestinian-protest-2023-10-11/
(6) https://www.politico.eu/article/israel-hamas-war-germany-germany-berlin/
(7) https://x.com/bmj_bund/status/1789963550024163589?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1789963550024163589%7Ctwgr%5Ee01466ab6c7be0124dd8656f3c76b7b8023fa2ed%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Funherd.com%2Fbreaking_news%2Fgerman-government-calls-from-the-river-to-the-sea-a-hamas-slogan%2F
Israel has been committing ethnic cleansing of the region since 1948, literally the land between the river and the sea, hence why the phrase was invented.
The majority of people saying “from the river to the sea” are referring to ending the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian people, as Israelis have literally been taking houses and farmland by force.
Israel has a heavy track record of claiming anyone who criticizes them is being antisemitic, and frankly river to sea might be one of the first things they have been twisting the meaning behind. The phrase does NOT refer to all Jews, it is referring to restoring PALESTINE.
Jewish Palestinians existed in peace with their Muslim and Christian neighbors before the European refugees came in and turned into a brutal colonizing entity.
It is about ISRAEL, NOT Jewish people as a whole
Censoring content with “from the river to the sea” won’t slow down the fight to decolonize Palestine, but it will lower engagement and confidence in Meta platforms amongst key groups that drive your revenue: gen Z and Millennials. At best, the idea that “from the river to the sea” is antisemitic comes from ignorance and at worst this “interpretation” is a deliberate attempt to censure and stifle yet another form of Palestinian resistance. It’s shameful that you’re even considering it. Instead of targeting this phrase maybe you should do something about the rampant transphobia, ableism, racism, misogyny, and xenophobia on your platforms that you allow to go unchecked.
Hello, this phrase should not be banned as it embodies the freedom which the Palestine people would like to attain. Freedom from hunger, famine, lack of movement, jobs, and other basic human rights. They want all of their areas of residence to be free, in this context.
From the river to the sea isn’t antisemitic. Banning it is racist because it targets overwhelmingly Palestinians and people of color.
It is not an anti semetic statement. It means equal rights for all.
Freedom evolves, words and ideas cannot be silenced under an agenda that's backing up genocide or any form of oppression against a certain ethnic, religious group. They're human beings and their mere existence shouldn't be dictated by a few.
From the river to the sea Palestine will be free.
From the river to the sea is a call for liberation for emancipated Palestinians. Assuming that it's anti-semitic is 100% projection.
From the river to the sea is not an anti-Semitic comment.
While Jewish people reside in Israel, they also reside in many other countries. Israel has also commonly professed that Arabs and
Non-Jews also live in their land freely as full citizens. It is not a claim against Jews, but one that seeks to recognize a historic ethnic cleansing that happened to a people who resided in that land and their continued oppression evidenced by the apartheid and occupation as well as numerous laws that seek to disenfranchise them. This phrase is limited to Israel, and a particular claim over a piece of land for which Palestinians have a legitimate historic claim. Shutting down slogans used to advocate for an oppressed people is a means to police speech that seeks to liberate a people who wish to be free within a land that exists between a river and a sea.
Speaking in the context of my own country if the indigenous people here sought to be free between the Pacific Ocean and the Fraser river and they had a phrase stating “ From the river to the sea Coast Salish will be free” and Canada or those who are in support of Canada sought to ban that phrase we would see such a banning as a form of oppression. It would be particularly egregious because it is a form of terre nullis meaning denying their existence or claim to the land. Meta must not side with the feelings of those who are in positions of power who seek to police speech. If Meta bans this phrase, meta may cement itself as a cog of government censorship and repression and anathema to those who do seek to be free in every land.
I live in America so I value freedom of speech! Including saying "to the River and the Sea". How is that phrase different from "from sea to shining sea"?
We as Americans value freedom of speech, including non-hateful speech on public platforms like Meta. "From the river to the sea" is not hateful whatsoever. What is hateful about the idea of peace and freedom for an entire land, from the river to the sea?
I'm American. I stand for protections of freedom of speech and I stand for peace and freedom for all, across all lands, from every river, to every sea.
Dear Oversight Board,
I’m writing as a regular Meta user to implore you to uphold Meta employees’ assessment that the use of the phrase “from the river to the sea” does not violate Meta’s community guidelines regarding hate speech. This phrase has been used for many years as a call for freedom and dignity of Palestinian people living in an apartheid state under Israeli occupation. Many Palestinians were forced to leave their homes in 1948, and in the following decades, when the country of Israel was established. More than 750,000 Palestinians were killed as part of this ethnic cleansing, and ethnic cleansing that is ongoing today. The phrase “from the river to the sea” does not call for Israelis to leave the land, and it certainly is not antisemitic or a call to ethnically cleanse Jewish people from the land. (In fact, many Jewish people, including myself, have used this phrase when voicing our support for Palestinian civilians to access their basic human rights and freedoms to move freely and to return to their homes; rights Israel has consistently denied Palestinians for decades.) The phrase is not a call for terrorism, but a call for freedom, dignity, and peace—a peace that acknowledges the human rights of all, regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion.
Thank you,
B.