Audit Methodology
How Incidents Are Collected, Classified, and Verified
1. Definition of Antisemitism
B’nai Brith Canada uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism to guide the identification and assessment of incidents included in this Audit.
2. Incident Data Collection
Incident reports are gathered through multiple channels to ensure comprehensive coverage.
These include:
- B’nai Brith Canada’s Anti-Hate Hotline, Mobile App, and Webform
- Law enforcement agencies
- Partner organizations
- Media and social media monitoring
3. Incident Classification Framework
Incidents are classified into three primary types:
Harassment
Vandalism
Violence
These categories help ensure consistant classification and analysis across all reported incidents.
4. Incident Review and Validation Process
To ensure accuracy, consistancy, and methodological rigour, each reported incident undergoes a multistage review:
- Every report is assessed independently by two researchers.
- A senior researcher reviews these assessments to determine whether the report meets the criteria to be classified as an incident.
- The complete set of incidents is then reviewed by members of B'nai Brith Canada's senior management team before being included in the Audit.
B’nai Brith Canada’s Annual Audit records incidents of antisemitism observed in Canada. This includes both criminal and non-criminal incidents of antisemitism. B’nai Brith Canada continues to employ the same methodology for receiving, recording, and analyzing incidents of antisemitism since the Annual Audit was first conceived in the 1980s. We have modified our approach where needed to adapt to changes in the field of contemporary antisemitism.
1) As the most authoritative, comprehensive, and representative definition of contemporary antisemitism that exists today, the IHRA definition of antisemitism is the definition B’nai Brith Canada uses to inform its Annual Audit.
2) The incidents contained in the Annual Audit are reported to B’nai Brith Canada using our Anti-Hate Hotline, Anti-Hate App, and Anti-Hate Webform, by law enforcement, by partner organizations, and through the media. Most of the incidents of violence, vandalism, and harassment that do not occur online are reported directly to B’nai Brith Canada by the victims or law enforcement. Incidents of antisemitism occurring online are both received through our reporting mechanisms and discovered through the proactive monitoring of social media and other open-source mediums.
We are extremely grateful for the opportunity to work closely with law enforcement across the country to ensure that our annual Audit contains the most up-to-date data on antisemitic hate crimes and hate-motivated occurrences. For the 2025 Annual Audit, we received data from 68 police forces across the country.
3) The Annual Audit recognizes three separate categories of antisemitic incidents: harassment, vandalism, and violence. B’nai Brith Canada uses definitions of harassment, vandalism, and violence that have been uniquely developed within a Canadian context.
Harassment
Harassment occurs when a person or group of persons knowingly, or with reckless disregard, interferes with a person or group of persons’ well-being. This may involve repeatedly following them, directly or indirectly communicating or attempting to communicate with them, besetting or watching them, and/or engaging in threatening conduct towards them.
An incident of harassment becomes an antisemitic incident when the harassment is demonstrated to be motivated by the harasser’s antisemitic beliefs or by antisemitic animus or when the content of the dissemination involved in the harassment is itself antisemitic.
Vandalism
Vandalism can occur against private or public property when a person or group of persons, without consent, destroys or damages said property, or renders that property dangerous, useless, inoperative, and/or ineffective. Examples of vandalism include graffitiing, postering, or otherwise defacing or damaging property.
An incident of vandalism becomes an antisemitic incident when the act of vandalism is motivated or inspired by antisemitic animus, when the vandalized property is targeted because of its affiliations or perceived affiliations with the Jewish faith, or when the vandalism contains antisemitic messaging or iconography.
Violence
Violence is the application of force without consent or the creation of a belief on reasonable grounds that force will be applied, directly or indirectly, against another person. Violent acts can occur with or without the use of a weapon. The harm inflicted, or potential harm that may be inflicted, is irrelevant.
An incident of violence becomes an antisemitic incident when the act is motivated by antisemitic animus or the victim is targeted for their affiliations or perceived affiliations with the Jewish faith.
Harmful activity targeting Jewish persons, including instances where Jewish Canadians are the victims of criminal activity, are not included in the Annual Audit unless there is evidence of specific antisemitic animus.
To fall within the scope of the Annual Audit, the incident in question must have taken place in Canada, stem from a dissemination made by a person identifying as Canadian or residing in Canada, or have explicitly targeted a Jewish Canadian, Canada’s Jewish community, or an organization or institution because of its affiliations or perceived affiliations with the Jewish faith and/or community.
4) Every incident of antisemitism recorded in the Annual Audit is rigorously reviewed by B’nai Brith Canada’s research team to verify its credibility and confirm that it meets the parameters of the IHRA definition of antisemitism. Whenever possible, incidents are also independently corroborated. Only reports that have been authenticated and properly assessed as falling within the IHRA definition are included in the Annual Audit.
The IHRA definition’s 11 illustrative examples are used to inform each assessment. Relevant best practices are employed to mitigate against research and analysis biases. Each report is assessed by two distinct researchers; only those reports which have been independently assessed to be antisemitic by both researchers move on to the next phase of our assessment process. At this stage, a senior researcher reviews the assessment before classifying it as an incident. The totality of incidents is then reviewed by members of our senior management team before they are included in the Annual Audit.
Each antisemitic incident is counted only once, regardless of how many times it has been reported. For online incidents, each post is recorded as one incident, no matter how many times it has been viewed. This is also the case for antisemitic flyers and publications. Each spree of distribution is counted as a singular incident. If the publication is shared at multiple locations or on different dates, each instance is recorded as one incident. Similarly, if multiple expressions of antisemitism take place at a single public event, for example, an antisemitic refrain being chanted repeatedly during a protest, only one incident is recorded.
In accordance with the IHRA definition’s illustrative examples, general criticisms of Israel and anti-Israel activism are not considered antisemitic. This includes support for Palestinian rights or expressions of opposition to the Israeli government and its policies. Only anti-Israel or anti-Zionist acts that fall within the parameters of the criteria outlined by the IHRA are included in the Annual Audit.
For example, if B’nai Brith Canada were to receive a report that an anti-Israel protest in Canada featured placards referring to the Prime Minister of Israel as a war criminal, that would not be classified as an incident in our Annual Audit. However if materials at the same protest contained language referring to Jews as war criminals, that would constitute an incident, as it would meet the criteria established in Example 11 of the IHRA definition: “Holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the State of Israel”.
Denying the atrocities perpetrated against Jewish people, such as the 19th–20th century pogroms or the October 7 terrorist attacks, in addition to denying the Holocaust, would all be considered antisemitic. This is within the spirit of IHRA Example 4: “Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust)”.
Using the Hakenkreuz (Nazi Hooked Cross) or other Nazi iconography in a public space, including online, is in the Annual Audit where applicable. The majority of Jewish people consider these symbols to reflect antisemitic hatred. However, these symbols are not included in our Audit when it cannot be demonstrated that the iconography was used with antisemitic animus.
Workplace-based discrimination or analogous forms of discrimination are not included in the Annual Audit unless such discrimination can be shown to have been the result of antisemitic animus. Likewise, expressions of racism and hatred are not included in the Annual Audit unless they were the result of antisemitic animus.