It was ruled in February that Professor David Miller was unfairly discriminated against when he was dismissed by the University of Bristol following allegations that he had made antisemitic remarks.

The tribunal’s 120-page judgment has now been published and details why his beliefs enjoy protection under the Equality Act.

Employment judge Rohan Pirani said: “Although many would vehemently and cogently disagree with [Miller]’s analysis of politics and history, others have the same or similar beliefs.

“We find that he has established that [the criteria] have been met and that his belief amounted to a philosophical belief.”

Professor Miller, who lectured on political sociology, told the panel that he thought Zionism was “inherently racist, imperialist and colonial”.

He said it was “ideologically bound to lead to the practices of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and genocide in pursuit of territorial control and expansion”. 

He was clear, however, that his opposition to Zionism was not opposition towards Jewish people in general.

In an email to the university’s student newspaper that was sent in February 2021, Professor Miller said: “Zionism is and always has been a racist, violent, imperialist ideology premised on ethnic cleansing.” 

He also said the university’s Jewish Society was an “Israel lobby group”. He was sacked for gross misconduct after an initial review had found he had no case to answer.

Of Miller’s anti-Zionism beliefs, Judge Pirani said: “We conclude that they have played a significant role in his life for many years. We are satisfied that they are genuinely held. He is and was a committed anti-Zionist and his views on this topic have played a significant role in his life for many years.”

His beliefs satisfied the criteria of being “worthy of respect in a democratic society, be not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others”.

The judge added: “[Professor Miller]’s opposition to Zionism is not opposition to the idea of Jewish self-determination or of a preponderantly Jewish state existing in the world, but rather, as he defines it, to the exclusive realisation of Jewish rights to self-determination within a land that is home to a very substantial non-Jewish population.”

He went on: “What [Miller] said was accepted as lawful, was not antisemitic and did not incite violence and did not pose any threat to any person’s health or safety.”

His compensation will, however, be halved because his email “contributed to and played a material part in his dismissal”. The level of compensation will be determined at a later remedy hearing.