Restore How to Sell a Genocide to Waverley Library and protect the Public's Right to Read

To Waverley Council and the Mayor of Waverley

We, the undersigned, call on Waverley Council to return Adam Johnson's "How to Sell a Genocide" to public circulation at Waverley Library , Bondi Junction, and uphold the principles of intellectual freedom, equal access to information and viewpoint diversity.

We are deeply concerned by the decision to remove the book from library shelves for review following a complaint reportedly concerning distress caused by its title and subject matter.

We acknowledge and respect the grief and trauma experienced by victims of violence and antisemitism. However, individual distress, offence or political disagreement should not determine what the broader public is permitted to access through a public library. Readers should be afforded the opportunity to access books freely and form their own opinions on the contents of the book read.

Public libraries exist to provide access to a broad range of opinions, histories and perspectives including those that are controversial, challenging or uncomfortable.

This issue therefore extends beyond one book and beyond Israel and Palestine. If offence or distress becomes a sufficient reason to remove lawful material from public access, an important question arises: Who gets to decide what the rest of the community may read?

The same principle must apply to books addressing colonisation, Aboriginal dispossession, racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, apartheid, war crimes, religion and other contested political and historical subjects.

Criticism of a state is not hatred of a people. This decision also occurs within a broader Australian debate about whether criticism of Israel and Zionism is being conflated with antisemitism.

In a recent NSW Supreme Court decision, Justice Desmond Fagan drew an important distinction between criticism of the State of Israel and hostility towards Jewish people:

“Disparagement of Israel is not antisemitic because the Jewish people, who as a whole are the object of antisemitism, are not coextensive with or in any sense equivalent to the state of Israel.”

Justice Fagan further recognised that people who criticise Israel and its treatment of Palestinians “have freedom to express their views”, while those who support Israel have the right “not to listen, not to read” or not to engage with those arguments.

That distinction is particularly relevant to public libraries. The appropriate response to a book with which a reader strongly disagrees is the freedom not to read it, not the removal of that book from everybody else's reach.

Criticism of Israel is also plainly a matter of significant public debate in Australia. Pew Research Center's Spring 2026 Global Attitudes Survey found that “79% of Australians surveyed held an unfavourable view of Israel, compared with 74% in 2025.”

This statistic does not determine whether any particular argument about Israel is right or wrong. Nor should majority opinion determine what belongs in a library. It demonstrates, however, that critical examination of Israel is part of a substantial and legitimate Australian public discourse.

Public libraries should facilitate informed engagement with such debates, not restrict the perspectives the community is permitted to encounter.

Our concern is heightened by the NSW Parliament's recent amendment to the Library Act 1939. In 2026, the Act was amended to expressly provide: “A local library is free to collect and make available library material.”

The stated purpose of this reform was to strengthen and protect the ability of public libraries to collect widely and to respond to challenges from individuals or groups seeking to limit the scope of library collections.

The removal of a controversial political book shortly after these protections were enacted therefore raises serious questions about the principles and processes being applied by Waverley Council.

We call on Waverley Council to:

1. Return How to Sell a Genocide to public circulation, unless its removal can be justified under ordinary, transparent and viewpoint-neutral professional collection-management criteria.

2. Publish the reasons for the book's removal and the criteria being applied during its review.

3. Explain how the decision and review process are consistent with the Library Act 1939 (NSW) and its 2026 amendments protecting the freedom of local libraries to collect and make available library material.

4. Confirm that political disagreement, offence or distress alone will not determine whether lawful material remains available to the public.

5. Ensure that library collection and review policies are transparent, professionally determined and applied consistently regardless of political, religious or ideological viewpoint.

6. Reaffirm Waverley Library's commitment to intellectual freedom and the public's right to access diverse and contested ideas.

Democracy requires access, not agreement

People do not need to agree with this book to defend its availability in a public library. The appropriate response to contested ideas is critical engagement, discussion and access to competing perspectives, not restricting the public's ability to encounter them.

Restoring How to Sell a Genocide does not require Waverley Council to endorse its arguments. It requires Council to trust members of the public to read, investigate, question and decide for themselves.

When public access to lawful information becomes dependent upon whether its contents cause political disagreement or discomfort, we set a concerning precedent for intellectual freedom and democratic participation at the local level. Public libraries belong to the whole community and so does the right to read.